Bombay High Court
HANMANTRAO DNYANBA PANHALEversusRAMCHANDRA HASHMATMAL UDHANI
- Disposal
- Dismissed
Holding
The petition is dismissed for default.
Summary
The petitioner, Hanmantrao Dnyanba Panhale, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Circuit Bench at Kolhapur, seeking relief against the respondent, Ramchandra Hashmatmal Udhani. The petition was presented without any counsel for the petitioner, as evidenced by the court's Farad Sheet showing constant absence of the petitioner's lawyer. The respondent was represented by Mr. Sharad T. Bhosale. The sole issue before the court was whether the petition could proceed despite the petitioner's lack of representation. The court held that the petition could not be entertained and dismissed it for default, citing procedural non‑compliance. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition should be dismissed for default due to the petitioner's counsel being constantly absent?
Subjects
- writ petition
- default dismissal
- civil appellate jurisdiction
- court procedure
Judgment
33-WP-5347-2001=.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 5347 OF 2001
Digitally
signed by Hanmantrao Dnyanba Panhale … Petitioner
UDAY
UDAY SHIVAJI
SHIVAJI JAGTAP Vs.
JAGTAP Date:
2026.09.08
13:14:48
+0530
Ramchandra Hashmatmal Udhani … Respondent
………….
None for the Petitioner
Mr.Sharad T. Bhosale for the Respondent
………….
CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.
DATE : 7th SEPTEMBER, 2026.
P. C. :
. None for the petitioner.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is constantly absent which is
apparent from the Farad Sheet.
3. The Writ Petition is dismissed for default.
( SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. )
Uday S. Jagtap 1 of 1
Checking your session…