Bombay High Court

OMPRAKASH JAGANNATH DAGAversusSTATE BANK OF HYDERABAD THROUGH ITS ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: SACHIN S DESHMUKH

Holding

The petition is dismissed as infructuous due to the passage of time.

Summary

The petitioner, Omprakash Jagannath Daga, filed Writ Petition No. 8316 of 2015 before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking relief against the State Bank of Hyderabad. The petition was argued by counsel Mr. Shailendra S. Gangakhedkar, while the respondent was represented by Mr. Ruturaj Patil. The court examined whether the petition could be entertained despite the lapse of a considerable period since the cause of action arose. It held that the passage of time had rendered the petition infructuous, meaning it could no longer yield any effective relief. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of as infructuous.

Issues considered

Whether a writ petition filed after a substantial lapse of time is maintainable or becomes infructuous

Subjects

limitation period
infructuous petition
writ jurisdiction
procedural default
high court disposal

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:25702



                                                                 904 WP8316.2015
                                              -1-

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                             904 WRIT PETITION NO. 8316 OF 2015

                              OMPRAKASH JAGANNATH DAGA
                                            VERSUS
                 STATE BANK OF HYDERABAD THROUGH ITS ASSISTANT
                             GENERAL MANAGER AND OTHERS
                                               ...
              Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Shailendra S Gangakhedkar
              Advocate for Respondent No.1 : Mr. Ruturaj Patil
                                               ...



                                          CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.
                                             Date : 02.07.2026

              PER COURT :-

              1.           Mr. Shailendra S. Gangakhedkar, learned counsel for

              the Petitioner submits that by passage of time Petition is

              rendered infructuous.


              2.           Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of as

              infructuous.




                                                    (SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.)

              marathe

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…