Bombay High Court

SHRI POPAT DATTATRAY SHINDE AND ORSversusSMT. RADHABAI BALASAHEB SHIRKE (DECD) THROUGH LRS. AND ANR

Decided: 21 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The petition is dismissed for non-prosecution due to failure to serve notice and lack of contact with counsel.

Summary

The petitioners, Shabnoor Popat Dattatray Shinde & Ors., filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court. Their counsel attempted to serve a communication to the petitioners, but it was returned marked 'insufficient address.' The petitioners were also unable to establish contact with their advocate. On this basis, the court found that the petition could not be progressed. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition for non-prosecution. No substantive merits of the petition were considered.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate procedural response when a petitioner's communication is returned as 'insufficient address' and the petitioner cannot be contacted through counsel?

Subjects

writ petition
non-prosecution
dismissal
service of notice
procedural default

Judgment

                                                                             29-wp-9238-2017.doc


                      Shabnoor
                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                        WRIT PETITION NO.9238 OF 2017

SHABNOOR
                      Popat Dattatray Shinde & Ors.                 … Petitioners
AYUB                             V/s.
PATHAN
                      Radhabai Balasaheb Shirke (Deceased)
Digitally signed by
SHABNOOR AYUB
PATHAN
                      Through LRs & Anr.                            … Respondents
Date: 2026.09.21
15:35:38 +0530


                      Ms. Kanak S. Upadhyay i/b Mr. Ketan Joshi, for the
                      Petitioners.


                                                   CORAM      : AMIT BORKAR, J.

                                                   DATED      : SEPTEMBER 21, 2026
                      P.C.:

                      1.      Learned Advocate for the Petitioners submits that the
                      communication sent by them to the Petitioners has been returned
                      with the remark “insufficient address.” The Petitioners are also not
                      in contact with their Advocate.

                      2.      Hence, the Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.


                                                                    (AMIT BORKAR, J.)




                                                         1

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

Kanak S Upadhyay