Bombay High Court

SAHARA HOSPITALITY LTDversusAIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND 4 ORS

Decided: 13 January 2026
Disposal: DISMISSED
Bench: M S KARNIK S M MODAK

Holding

The writ petition is dismissed for non‑prosecution due to the petitioner's failure to appear and lack of interest.

Summary

Sahara Hospitality Ltd filed a writ petition (WP No. 798 of 2024) challenging actions of the Airports Authority of India and others. The petition was scheduled for hearing, but the petitioner failed to appear on multiple occasions, indicating a lack of interest in prosecuting the case. The respondents, represented by counsel Vishal Talsania and Jyoti Mhatre, were present. The Court observed the petitioner's non‑appearance and concluded that the petition could not be pursued further. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition for non‑prosecution and also disposed of the related interim application, as it could not survive the dismissal.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate judicial response when a petitioner fails to appear for scheduled hearings and shows no interest in prosecuting a writ petition?

Subjects

writ petition
non‑prosecution
dismissal
civil procedure
court discretion

Judgment

                                                           902-wp 798-24.doc

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                   ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

                      WRIT PETITION NO. 798 OF 2024
                                  WITH
                INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 19079 OF 2025

Sahara Hospitality Ltd.                                   … Petitioner
        Versus
Airports Authority of India & Ors.                         ... Respondents

                         __________________________

None for the Petitioner.
Mr. Vishal Talsania (through VC) a/w. Ms. Radha H. Bhandari i/b M. V. Kini
& Co. for the Respondent-AAI in WP and Applicant in IA.
Ms. Jyoti Mhatre for the Respondent-BMC.
                        __________________________

                                       CORAM       : M. S. KARNIK AND
                                                     S. M. MODAK, JJ.
                                       DATED       : 13th JANUARY, 2026.

P.C. :

1.       None appeared for the Petitioner when called out for hearing. There

was no appearance on behalf of the Petitioner yesterday also. It appears

that the Petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the Petition.         The

Petition is dismissed for non prosecution.

2.       In view of dismissal of Writ Petition, Interim Application does not

survive and stands disposed of.



(S. M. MODAK, J.)                                        (M. S. KARNIK, J.)



 Amk                                                                 1/1

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

Jyoti Mhatre