Bombay High Court

PRADEEP GULABRAO BORDEversusWILLIAM ALBERT SMITHA AND ORS

Decided: 11 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The petition was dismissed as not pressed due to the pendency of a statutory appeal.

Summary

The petitioner, Pradeep Gulabrao Borde, filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court, but had already instituted a statutory appeal against an order dated 20 February 2026 before the Charity Commissioner, which was still pending. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the writ petition was not intended to be pursued on its merits and sought leave to continue the pending appeal. The Court, noting the existence of the pending appeal, declined to entertain parallel proceedings. Without addressing the substantive merits, the Court disposed of the petition on the ground that it was not pressed. The petition was therefore dismissed, with liberty to the petitioner to pursue the statutory appeal.

Issues considered

Whether a writ petition can be entertained when a statutory appeal against the same order is pending
Whether parallel proceedings are permissible in the same matter

Subjects

writ petition
parallel proceedings
statutory appeal
jurisdiction
dismissal

Judgment

                                   Digitally
                                   signed by
                                   CHITRA
                          CHITRA   SANJAY
                          SANJAY   SONAWANE
                          SONAWANE Date:
                                   2026.09.13
                                   17:12:43
                                   +0530




Chitra Sonawane.                                                  37-wp-5106-26.doc



               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                         WRIT PETITION NO.5106 OF 2026

Pradeep Gulabrao Borde                           .. Petitioner

                   Vs.

William Albert Smith & Ors.                     .. Respondents.

                                 ...
Mr. Sharad Suryavanshi a/w Ms. Tamanna Bafna i/by Ajay Khaire for the
Petitioner.

Mr. Rajesh More for Respondent Nos.1, 2, 3 and 5.

Mrs. Neha Bhide, GP a/w Mr. OA CHandurkar, Addl. GP and Mrs. RM
Shinde, AGP for the State.
                               ...

                   CORAM : MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, CJ. &
                           ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.

                   DATE            : 11th SEPTEMBER, 2026.

P.C. :

1.        At the outset, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the

Petitioner has already filed a Statutory Appeal against Impugned Order

dated 20th February 2026, before Charity Commissioner, which is stated

to be pending consideration. Considering this factual situation, we are

not inclined to permit the Petitioner to press parallel proceedings.




                                                  1
Chitra Sonawane.                                           37-wp-5106-26.doc



2.        Confronted with the said situation, learned Counsel for the

Petitioner submits that he is not pressing the instant petition, with leave

to pursue such Appeal, on its own merits and in accordance with law.



3.        In view of the above, without adverting to the merits of the matter,

the Petition stands Disposed of, as not pressed, with liberty in the above

terms.



[ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.]                            [CHIEF JUSTICE]




                                        2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…