Bombay High Court
SHRI SAHADU VITHU SURVE (DECD) BY HEIRS AND ORSversusSMT VIMALABAI VITHALRAO DAFTARDAR (DECD) BY HEIRS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Dismissed
Holding
The petition is dismissed for non‑prosecution and any interim relief stands vacated.
Summary
The petitioners, heirs of the deceased Shri Sahadu Vithu Surve, failed to appear in court and did not engage new counsel despite multiple orders directing them to do so. The court issued notices and gave a six‑week deadline for the petitioners to appoint an advocate, which was ignored. Affidavits confirming the return of mailed notices were filed, but no new representation was taken up. Consequently, the court found the petitioners uninterested in pursuing the writ petition. The petition was therefore dismissed for non‑prosecution and any interim relief previously granted was vacated.
Issues considered
- Can a writ petition be dismissed for non‑prosecution when petitioners fail to appear and do not engage counsel?
- Does the dismissal of the petition vacate any interim or ad interim relief previously granted?
Subjects
- writ petition
- non‑prosecution
- dismissal
- advocate engagement
- interim relief
- civil procedure
Judgment
4-WP-679-2000.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 679 OF 2000
Shri Sahadu Vithu Surve (decd) By Heirs And
NAVNATH Ors.
SITARAM ...Petitioners
WAGHMARE
Versus
Digitally signed Smt. Vimalabai Vithalrao Daftardar (decd) By
by NAVNATH
SITARAM ...Respondents
WAGHMARE Heirs and Ors.
Date: 2026.09.16
17:49:40 +0530
****
None for the Petitioners.
Mr. Hrutik R. Chavan h/f Mr. Ashutosh Kulkarni, for Respondents- 1(a)
to 1(d).
****
CORAM : M.M. SATHAYE, J.
DATE : 16th SEPTEMBER, 2026
P.C. :
1. On 09.06.2026, the following order was passed:
“1. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that despite his
best efforts including a written communication to the Petitioners,
they are not responding with appropriate instructions to proceed
with the petition. He further submits that Petitioner No. 1(b), 1(c)
and 1(d), Petitioner No.2(a) have expired and their legal heirs are
not coming forward.
2. In view of the said submissions, petition stands abated for
Petitioner Nos. 1(b), 1(c), and 1(d) and Petitioner No.2(a).
3. Office is directed to issue notice to remaining Petitioners,
returnable on 06.07.2026. Notice to indicate that if the Petitioners
do not appear despite notice, appropriate ex-parte order will be
passed.”
Navnath Waghmare 1
4-WP-679-2000.doc
2. On 27.07.2026, the following order was passed:
“1. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that pursuant to the
earlier order dated 09.06.2026, private communication was issued
to the remaining Petitioners. He submits that packets sent to 1(a),
1(e) 1(f) and 2(c) have returned with postal endorsements that
parties are ‘not found on the given address’ or ‘left’. He states that
the Petitioner No.2(d) Mr. Suresh Pandurang Surve is present in
the Court and he is duly identified by him. He submits that Mr.
Suresh Surve informed that the Petitioners are willing to engage
another Advocate.
2. Advocate for the Petitioner is at liberty to file affidavit placing on
record the returned packets indicating that his clients have left the
address without informing the Court or Advocate.
3. In view of above, Petitioner No.2(d) is given 6 weeks time to
engage new Advocate as a last chance. If new Advocate is not
engaged within 6 weeks, appropriate ex-parte order may be
passed in the matter.
4. Stand over to 07.09.2026.”
3. On 07.09.2026, the following order was passed:
“1. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that affidavit
placing on record the returned packet, is already filed. Registry to
verify and make necessary endorsement on next date.
2. Despite last order dated 27.07.2026, no new Advocate seems
to have been engaged on behalf of the Petitioners.
3. Stand over to 16.09.2026. To be listed for ‘dismissal’.”
4. Today, nobody is appearing for the Petitioners. As already
Navnath Waghmare 2
4-WP-679-2000.doc
noted, no new advocate is engaged on behalf of the Petitioners. It
appears that the Petitioners are not interested to proceed with the
matter any further.
5. Hence, the petition is dismissed for non prosecution. Interim/
ad interim relief, if any, stands vacated.
6. All concerned to act on duly authenticated or digitally signed
copy of this order.
(M.M. SATHAYE, J.)
Navnath Waghmare 3
Checking your session…