← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/13201/2024rule made absolute

Sunil Gokarna Dubey And ORS v. The State Of Maharashtra And ORS

2025-05-08Hon'Ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal Jain , Hon'Ble Shri Justice M.S. Sonak2 pages

908-WP-13201-24.DOCX Sayali

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

SAYALI DEEPAK UPASANI CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 13201 OF 2024 SAYALI DEEPAK UPASANI Date: 2025.05.08 17:58:12 +0530 Sunil Gokarna Deubey and Others

...Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and Others

...Respondents

______________________________________________________ Mr Mayank Tripathi i/b Mr. Bhushan Walimbe, for Petitioners. Mr G. T. Kanchanpurkar, for Respondent No. 5. Mr. A. I. Patel, Additional G. P. with Mr. Aditya Deolekar, AGP for State.

______________________________________________________

CORAM:

M.S. Sonak & Jitendra Jain, JJ.

DATED:

08 May 2025 PC:- 1.

If the amount is not directly paid but is deposited in this Court, liberty is granted to the Petitioners to withdraw the said amount by providing their Bank Account to the Registry so that the Registry can transfer the amount directly into such Bank Account.

2.

This is an application on behalf of Respondent No. 5 seeking an extension of time to deposit the amount. The Respondent No. 5 has filed an affidavit cum undertaking that he will deposit the amount of Rs.9,43,495/- which he has received latest by 30 September 2025.

908-WP-13201-24.DOCX 3.

Learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 5 states that he has explained the consequences of not complying with this undertaking to the Respondent No. 5 and the Respondent No. 5 has understood the consequences.

4.

Accordingly, by accepting the undertaking, the time for depositing the amount of Rs.9,43,495/- by the Respondent No. 5 is extended up to 30 September 2025.

5.

However, we clarify that Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 will have to comply with this Court's direction and it is open to the Petitioners to take out appropriate proceedings for enforcing the directions issued to Respondent Nos. 6 and 7. 6.

The praecipe for extension of time is now disposed of after observing that the Respondent No. 5 should have filed an interim application and not just a praecipe. 7.

The Undertaking is taken on record and marked as 'X' for identification.

(Jitendra Jain, J) (M.S. Sonak, J)