Dalvi And Sons, A Huf Acting Thr. Karta, Manoj Tukaram Dalvi v. M/S. Pancham Trading, Acting Thr. Proprietor, Omprakash K. Bhirani
2026:BHC-NAG:5221 1 CAW729-26inWP7387-25(D).odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION (W) NO.729/2026 IN WRIT PETITION NO.7387/2025 (D) (DALVI & SONS VERSUS M/S PANCHAM TRADING, NAGPUR) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders.
Shri R.M. Sharma, counsel for the applicant-petitioner. CORAM : PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.
DATE : MARCH 24, 2026 By this application, the applicant seeks modification and clarification of the judgment and order dated 09.03.2026 passed by this Court by which the writ petition was finally decided. 2.
The applicant submits that the grievance raised in the writ petition pertained to the failure of the Appellate Court to adjudicate the issue about entitlement of the petitioner for arrears of license fees from 01.02.2017 which was claimed by the petitioner before the Appellate Court. It is pointed out that by the judgment dated 09.03.2026, the petition was finally decided and the matter is remanded to the Appellate Court to consider the issue about the claim of the petitioner for arrears of license fees. However, the reasoning part of the judgment, particularly paragraph 8, containing a direction to the Appellate Court to decide the application afresh, needs to be clarified by stating the scope of reconsideration of the said application. It is also submitted that the controversy involved in the petition is with respect to the right of
2 CAW729-26inWP7387-25(D).odt the petitioner as against the respondent, who are the licensor and licensee and therefore, their status as licensor and licensee need to be clarified.
3.
It has to be noted that in the main petition, notices were served upon the respondent and despite service of notice and grant of sufficient opportunities, nobody had appeared on its behalf and in that background, the writ petition was finally decided. By the present application, the applicant-petitioner is seeking only aforesaid clarification without seeking any additional relief and therefore this application is taken up for decision. 4.
On perusal of the contents of the application, submissions advanced by the applicant-petitioner and the judgment dated 09.03.2026, it appears that the writ petition is decided and the matter is remanded to the Appellate Court for deciding the only issue about the entitlement of the petitioner for arrears of license fees and therefore, it is necessary to clarify that the matter is remanded only to consider the application to this limited extent as the order dated 09.10.2025 passed by the Appellate Court regarding deposit of future monthly license fees of Rupees Forty Thousand per month is not disturbed. Further, considering the controversy in between the petitioner and the respondent vis-a-vis their status as licensor and licensee, it is necessary to clarify their status to avoid any confusion.
3 CAW729-26inWP7387-25(D).odt 5.
Although there is a reference to their status as landlord and tenant in the judgment passed by the trial Court in Regular Civil Suit no.37 of 2015, the controversy being in between the licensor and licensee, their status need to be clarified. 6.
In view of this, I find it necessary to allow the application and clarify the order to avoid any confusion. Hence, the following order is passed:- I.
At the end of paragraph 8 of the judgment dated 09.03.2026, following sentence be inserted:- 'The Appellate Court is required only to adjudicate the issue of entitlement of the licensor for arrears of license fees and the earlier order passed by the Appellate Court dated 09.10.2025 (judgment impugned in the writ petition) to the extent of direction to pay future license fees of Rupees Forty Thousand per month is not disturbed.'
II.
Further, the status of the parties be clarified by mentioning 'licensor and licensee' instead of 'landlord and tenant' wherever these words appear.
III.
The modified order be accordingly uploaded.
7.
The civil application is allowed in aforesaid terms and disposed of.
4 CAW729-26inWP7387-25(D).odt CIVIL APPLICATION (W) NO.696/2026.
This is an application for speaking to the minutes. The learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the civil application.
2.
Permission is granted. The civil application is disposed of as withdrawn.
(PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.) APTE Signed by: Apte Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 02/04/2026 19:17:14