Ratndeep Sakharam Deshmukh And ORS v. M/S Bahinabai Construction L. L. P M/S Dudhe Brothers Thr. Its. Partner (T. U. Dudhe) And ORS

WAKLE MANOJ JANARDHAN Manoj 5-WP-4371-2025.doc WAKLE MANOJ JANARDHAN Date: 2026.01.17 10:08:41 +0530

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4371 OF 2025 Ratndeep Sakharam Deshmukh & Ors.

.....Petitioners Vs.

M/s Bahinabai Construction L.L.P.

M/s Dudhe Brothers Through Its Partner Tukaram Ukarde Dudhe & Ors.

.....Respondents __________________________________________ Mr. Suraj Mhadgut and Ms. Jenny Somaiya i/by Mr. Vilas Mali, for the Petitioners.

Mr. S. H. Kankal, AGP for the Respondent-State. __________________________________________ CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND SHYAM C. CHANDAK, JJ.

DATE : 13th JANUARY, 2026.

P.C.:- 1) This Petition was called out for hearing in the morning session. Advocate Mr. Suraj Mhadgut had appeared on behalf of the Advocate on record for the Petitioners. It be noted here that, Advocate Mhadgut had appeared without brief in the Court and casually sought adjournment. This Court did not appreciate the conduct of the concerned Advocate and had directed him to point out, as to how this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable. He therefore requested this Court to keep back the Petition and to call in the second session. 1.1) The Petition was thereafter called out for hearing in the second session when Advocate Ms. Jenny Somaiya appeared. When this Court 1/2

Manoj 5-WP-4371-2025.doc inquired about the earlier Advocate Mr. Suraj Mhadgut and the discussion took place in the morning session, she requested this Court to keep the Petition back and requested to be called out at the end of board. 1.2) The Petition was again called out at the end of the board for hearing, when none of the above noted Advocates appeared. 2) It appears that, the Petitioners are not interested in pursuing the Petition.

3) Dismissed for non-prosecution.

(SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.) (A.S. GADKARI, J.) 2/2