Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

DHUDKABAI TAHNA BACHAV AND ANOTHERversusBUDHA RAMCHANDRA MALI AND ANOTHER

Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The writ petition is disposed, but the petitioners are granted liberty to institute appropriate proceedings if the civil suit is restored.

Summary

The petitioners, Dhu... Tahna Bachav and another, filed a writ petition seeking relief after the civil suit R.C.S. No. 32 of 2016 pending before the Civil Judge Senior Division, Chalisgaon was dismissed on 11 March 2022 for non‑prosecution. They contended that, with the dismissal of the suit, there was nothing left for the writ petition to address. However, they requested liberty to institute appropriate proceedings should the civil suit be restored. The Court examined whether the writ petition could be dismissed on the ground that the underlying suit no longer existed and whether the petitioners could be granted leave to revive the suit. The Court held that the writ petition stands disposed but granted the petitioners liberty to file fresh proceedings if the civil suit is reinstated. Accordingly, the petition was disposed with the liberty as prayed for.

Issues considered

  • What is the appropriate disposition of a writ petition when the underlying civil suit has been dismissed for non‑prosecution?
  • Whether the petitioners may be granted leave to institute fresh proceedings if the dismissed civil suit is later restored?

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • civil suit
  • non‑prosecution
  • leave to institute proceedings
  • dismissal
  • restoration of suit

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:16973
                                                      1                       935.doc



                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD
                            935 WRIT PETITION NO. 6000 OF 2019

                         DHUDKABAI TAHNA BACHAV AND ANOTHER
                                       VERSUS
                         BUDHA RAMCHANDRA MALI AND ANOTHER
                                               ...


                      Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Patil Ujwal Subhash
           Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr. Pawar K. Ippar h/f. Mr. Shinde Sharad S.
                                                …
                                             CORAM        : ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.
                                               DATE       : 18.04.2026
                  PER COURT :
                  .     Mr. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
                  proceedings of R.C.S. No. 32 of 2016 pending before the learned Civil
                  Judge Senior Division, Chalisgaon itself has been dismissed on
                  11.03.2022 for non-prosecution.

                  2.    As such, nothing survives in this Writ Petition. He however, seeks
                  leave to take out appropriate proceedings in case the Civil Suit is
                  restored. Leave granted.

                  3.    The Writ Petition accordingly, stands disposed of with a liberty as
                  prayed for.




                                                          ( ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J. )




   vsj..


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.