Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

SMT. ANURADHA ARUN KORGAONKAR AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The writ petition was dismissed and the petition stood disposed.

Summary

The petitioners, Smt. Anuradha Arun Korgaonkar and another, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Kolhapur Circuit Bench, seeking relief against the State of Maharashtra and others. Their counsel indicated that he had no instructions in the matter and pointed out that the petitioners had already initiated a parallel Vahivat case against respondents numbered 4 to 12. The Court considered that the existence of the parallel suit rendered the present petition unnecessary. Consequently, the Court expressed that it was not inclined to entertain the writ petition. The petition was therefore ordered to stand disposed. No substantive merits of the petition were examined.

Issues considered

  • The Court's discretion to entertain a writ petition when a parallel suit is already pending

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • parallel proceedings
  • petition dismissed
  • jurisdiction
  • high court

Judgment

                                                                                 23-WP-9867-2023(C).doc


                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                                               CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                              WRIT PETITION NO. 9867 OF 2023

                        Smt. Anuradha Arun Korgaonkar And Anr.                     ...Petitioners
                                  Versus
                        The State of Maharashtra and Others                        ...Respondents

                                                        ——————
                        Mr. Sahil A. Pandire i/by Mr. Ashok S. Pandire, for the Petitioners.
                        Mr. Vikas M. Mali, AGP for the Respondent-State.
                                                       ——————

                                                          CORAM :       SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH &
                                                                        NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ.

                                                          DATE       : AUGUST 21, 2026.

                        P. C. :

                        1.        Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners submits that he

                        does not have instructions in the matter. Considering the relief sought

                        in the Petition, the Petitioners have already initiated the Vahivat case

                        against Respondent Nos.4 to 12. In view of the same, we are not

                        inclined to entertain the Petition.

                        2.        The Petition stands disposed of.




                         [NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.]                        [SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.]
           Digitally
           signed by
           SAJAKALI
SAJAKALI   LIYAKAT
LIYAKAT    JAMADAR
JAMADAR    Date:
           2026.08.21
           18:06:14
           +0530


                        Jamadar-SL                          1 of 1


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.