Parvatibai Mahadeo Randive And Another v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

930ca5366.25.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 930 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5366 OF 2025 IN WP/6940/2014 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6940 OF 2014 PARVATIBAI MAHADEO RANDIVE AND ANOTHER

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2-State : Mr. A.S.Deshmukh Advocate for Respondent No. 5 in W.P.: Mr.Vika S. Tanwade Advocate for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 In W.P. : Mr. Omkar Patil h/f Mr. S. S. Shinde ...

CORAM : ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.

DATE : 20.09.2025.

PER COURT :

1.

None appears for the applicants.

2.

Learned Advocate Mr. Tanwade appeared for the legal representatives of the original respondent No. 5 and submitted that the petitioners have not stated satisfactory reasons for the application's nonfiling in time. The reason stated in the application is not proper to condone the delay; therefore, he urged for the rejection of the application.

3.

On perusing the record, it seems that respondent No. 5 expired on 27.03.2017 during the pendency of the petition, and the

930ca5366.25.odt applicants recently learned about this; therefore, they have moved this application.

4.

However, considering the fact that during pendency of the petition, respondent No. 5 has died and the petition is still pending against rest of the respondents, therefore, I am of the view that it would be appropriate to condone the delay by setting aside abatement order, if any, passed against respondent No. 5 and to bring his the legal representatives on record. As such, the application is allowed as prayed.

5.

The applicants are directed to bring the legal representatives of respondent No. 5 on record within one week and supply copies of the amended petition to the respondents, failing which the application shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Court.

6.

List the matter on 13.10.2025.

( ABHAY J. MANTRI J.) mahajansb/