Bombay High Court

PAWANKUMAR MANBODH PAL AND ANRversusPIRAMAL FINANCE LTD AND ORS

Decided: 31 August 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.

Summary

The petitioners failed to appear before the Court and did not ensure that the petition was served on the State as required. The learned Additional Government Pleader raised a grievance regarding non‑service of the petition on the State. The Court observed that the petitioners had lost interest in prosecuting the writ petition, having also been absent on a previous date. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition for want of prosecution. No substantive merits of the petition were considered.

Issues considered

Whether the petition was properly served on the State
Whether the petitioners' failure to appear and prosecute warrants dismissal for want of prosecution

Subjects

writ petition
service of process
want of prosecution
dismissal

Judgment

                                                                         6-WP983-2026.DOC

                                                                                  Santosh

                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                                      WRIT PETITION NO. 983 OF 2026

                      Pawankumar Manbodh Pal & Anr.                        ...Petitioners
                                        Versus
                      Piramal Finance Ltd. & Ors.                        …Respondents

                      None for the Petitioners.
                      Ms. Savina Crasto, AGP for the Respondent-State.
SANTOSH
SUBHASH                                                  CORAM:     N. J. JAMADAR, J.
KULKARNI                                                 DATED:     31st AUGUST, 2026
Digitally signed by
SANTOSH SUBHASH
KULKARNI
Date: 2026.09.01
10:48:38 +0530
                      PC:-

                      1.     None present for the petitioners.


                      2.     The learned AGP makes a grievance that the copy of the

                      petition has not been served on the State.


                      3.     None had appeared for the petitioner on 27 th January,

                      2026 as well. It appears that the petitioners have lost interest in

                      prosecuting this petition.


                      4.     The petition stands dismissed for want of prosecution.




                                                                  [N. J. JAMADAR, J.]




                                                      1/1

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…