1 of 3 904-WP.11153.2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 904 WRIT PETITION NO. 11153 OF 2016 MANISHA HEMANT SALI VERSUS HEMANT CHUNNILAL SALI ... Mr. Mohammad Naseer A. Shaikh, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. Mukulanand R. Wagh, Advocate for Respondent. ... CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : 10th APRIL, 2026 P.C.:- 1. Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties. 2. By the present petition, the Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 09.10.2015 passed by the learned Adhoc District Judge-1, Shahada in Misc. Civil Application No.12 of 2011, whereby the application filed for restoration of Civil Appeal No.22 of 2009 came to be dismissed. 3. Mr. Shaikh, learned Advocate for the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner had preferred Civil Appeal No.22 of 2009 challenging the order passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Shahada in H.M.P. No.49 of 2007. However, when the appeal was listed before the Appellate Court, the learned Advocate representing the Petitioner remained absent, and consequently, the appeal came to be dismissed for want of prosecution. Thereafter, the Petitioner filed an application Tauseef 2026:BHC-AUG:16343 2 of 3 904-WP.11153.2016 for restoration of the appeal, which came to be rejected by the Appellate Court. It is submitted that since the appeal was not decided on merits, one more opportunity deserves to be granted to the Petitioner. 4. Per contra, Mr. Wagh, learned Advocate for the Respondent, strongly opposed the petition contending that the decree of divorce has already been passed and, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by restoring the appeal. 5. Having heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties and upon perusal of the record, it is evident that the appeal came to be dismissed solely on account of absence of the learned Advocate for the Petitioner and not on merits. In such circumstances, in order to afford an opportunity of hearing and to ensure that the matter is decided on merits, the impugned order deserves to be set aside. 6. Hence, the following order: O R D E R (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The order dated 09.10.2015 passed by the learned Adhoc District Judge, Shahada in Misc. Civil Application No.12 of 2011 is hereby quashed and set aside. (iii) Misc. Civil Application No.12 of 2011 stands allowed. (iv) Civil Appeal No.22 of 2009 is restored to the file of the Tauseef 3 of 3 904-WP.11153.2016 Appellate Court. (v) The Appellate Court shall decide the appeal afresh on its own merits, in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to both the parties. (vi) The parties shall appear before the Appellate Court on a date to be fixed by that Court. (vii) The appeal shall be disposed of expeditiously. (SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.) Tauseef