Bombay High CourtMCA/655/2019rejected at admission stage

Shyam Dwarkadas Khandelwal v. Subhash Alleging To Be Adopted S/O Bajirao Wankhade And Another

2019-06-20Hon'Ble Shri Justice Z.A. Haq2 pages

1 cao76.16

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION (CAO) NO. 76 OF 2016 IN MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION(ST.) NO.25449 OF 2015 IN REJ. WRIT PETITION NO.88 OF 2015 (SHYAM DWARKADAS KHANDELWAL...VS.. SUBHASH ALLEGING TO BE ADOPTED SON OF BAJIRAO WANKHADE & ANR.) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.

DATED : JUNE 20, 2019.

None for the applicant/petitioner.

As the office objections were not removed, the learned Registrar (Judicial) by order dated 19th January 2015 directed that if the office objections were not removed within 14 days, registration shall stand refused. The petitioner failed to remove the office objections within 14 days as directed and therefore, registration of the petition was refused. The petitioner has filed Misc. Civil Application (Stamp) No. 25449 of 2015 against the order passed by the learned Registrar (Judicial) and had prayed that the petition be restored. As there is delay of about 316 days in filing the Misc.Civil Application, this Civil Application is filed. This Civil Application is filed on 22nd December 2015. There is nothing on record to suggest that the applicant/petitioner has been vigilant in prosecuting the matter.

2 cao76.16 Hence, the Civil Application is dismissed and consequently the Miscellaneous Civil Application is rejected. As the challenges of the petition on merits are not considered, the applicant/ petitioner will be at liberty to file fresh petition to challenge the impugned order, if so advised. JUDGE RRaut..