← Library
Bombay High CourtCA/9904/2025disposed off

Savita Mahesh Wanjari And ORS v. Rajesh Shantilal Lalwani And Anothers

2025-09-12Hon'Ble Shri Justice Ajit B. Kadethankar2 pages

27-sr942.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9904 OF 2025 IN CRA/101/2022 Savita Mahesh Wanjari And Ors

VERSUS

Rajesh Shantilal Lalwani And Another ---- Mr.J.R.Shah, Advocate for applicants Mr.S.H.Tripathi, Advocate for respondent no.7 Mr.G.L.Gujar, Advocate for respondent no.10 Mr.S.S.Kulkarni, Advocate for respondent no.30 Mr.S.S.Rathi, Advocate h/f Mr.G.S.Rane, Advocate for respondent nos.1 and 3 Mr.S.B.Yawalkar, Advocate for respondent nos.4 and 5 ----

CORAM

:

AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.

DATE :

SEPTEMBER 12 2025 ORDER :- Mr. Shah, learned counsel for revision applicant submits that during pendency of the present Civil Revision Application, applicant no.11 namely, Harish, died, leaving behind him, his legal representatives as 11A, 11B and 11C. He submits that the rights of deceased applicant no.11 devolved in the proposed legal representatives 11A, 11B and 11C. With this, he seeks to amend the title clause by bringing legal representatives of deceased applicant no.11.

2.

Mr.Rathi, learned counsel representing the contesting parties, points out that there is delay of 162 days caused in filing

27-sr942 present application. He graciously submits that there may not be objection for bringing the legal representatives of deceased applicant no.11 on record. However, delay caused in filing present application may considered.

3.

Having heard the parties, I am of the considered view that considering the nature of litigation and the reliefs sought in the present Civil Revision Application as well as those, which have been under adjudication in the subordinate proceedings, in the interest of justice, the application deserves to be allowed and applicant nos.11A, 11B and 11C deserve to be permitted to represent applicant no.11 in the capacity of his legal representatives. 4.

The Civil Application is, therefore, allowed in terms of prayer clause (A), by condoning delay. Amendment be carried out within four weeks.

[AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.] KBP