Bombay High Court

RAKESH ASHOKKUMAR SOMAIYAversusSAYED ALI JALIL HUSSAINI

Decided: 28 August 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

Since the underlying civil suit was withdrawn, the writ petition was disposed without merits, but the petitioners may file fresh proceedings for restoration of possession, and the time spent on the writ petition will not be counted towards the limitation period.

Summary

The petitioners filed a writ petition alleging that the respondent-landlord had forcibly taken possession of the suit property during the pendency of a civil suit. The petitioners sought relief to restore possession. The court observed that the underlying civil suit had been withdrawn by the plaintiff, rendering the writ petition moot. Consequently, the court disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioners liberty to initiate fresh proceedings for restoration of possession if they wish. The court clarified that it had not expressed any view on the merits and that any time spent on the writ petition would be excluded from the limitation period for any subsequent suit.

Issues considered

Whether a writ petition seeking restoration of possession can be entertained when the underlying civil suit has been withdrawn.
Whether the petitioners are entitled to any relief from the writ petition in such circumstances.
Whether the period spent on the writ petition should be counted towards the limitation period for any future proceedings.

Subjects

writ petition
possession
civil suit withdrawal
restoration of possession
limitation period
High Court of Bombay

Judgment

                                                  34-WP-6597-2026.DOC




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                  CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                 WRIT PETITION NO.6597 OF 2026


Rakesh Ashokkumar Somaiya & Ors.                   …Petitioners
  Versus
Sayed Ali Jalil Hussaini & Ors.                    …Respondents


Adv. Faiyaz Khan a/w Aasim Gholap, for the Petitioners.
Adv. Pramod Patil a/w Ajit Hon & Atharva Deshmukh i/b PNP &
Associates, for the Respondent No.1.
Adv. Ashwini A. Purav, AGP, for the Respondent-State Nos.2 & 3.



                      CORAM:       ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.
                      DATED :      28th August 2026
PC:-


1.      Heard learned counsel for the parties.


2.      Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners submits that

during the pendency of the Civil Suit, forceful possession of the

Suit Property is taken by the Respondent-Landlord. He submits

that the suit particularly was filed for seeking possession from the

Petitioner. However, in the interregnum during the pendency of the

proceedings the possession of the Petitioners has been forcibly

taken by the Respondent-Landlord.




                                 Page 1
Akash
                                                   34-WP-6597-2026.DOC




3.      The learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents/Original

Plaintiffs has disputed this position.


4.      However, we find that the suit has itself been withdrawn by

the Plaintiff. Considering the same, the present Writ Petition is

disposed of with liberty to the Petitioners to take such appropriate

steps as are available in law to seek restoration of possession of the

suit premises. If such an applications/proceedings are filed, the

concerned Court would decide the same in accordance with law.


5.      It is clarified that I have not expressed anything on the

merits of the contentions raised before this Court. If such a

proceedings are filed, the time taken in proceedings with the

present Writ Petition, be excluded in computing the period of

limitation in filing such proceedings.


6.      The Writ Petition is disposed of with above observations.




                                           [ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.]




                                 Page 2
Akash

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…