Megha 9_WP_13589_2022.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.13589 OF 2022 Gulab Gajanan Thopate and Anr. ...Petitioners V/s. Prabhakar Dadaso Yadav and Ors. ...Respondents ______________ Mr. Pritam S. Nigade for the Petitioners. ______________ CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATED: 2 FEBRUARY 2026. P.C.: 1) Petition challenges order dated 25 July 2022 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Saswad, District-Pune, rejecting Petitioners’ Applications at Exhibits-43, 44 and 51. The Application at Exhibit43 was for bringing the legal heirs of the Plaintiff on record. The Application at Exhibit-44 was for setting aside the abatement and Application at Exhibit-51 was for condonation of delay in setting aside the abatement. 2) I have heard Mr. Nigade, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners and considered the submissions canvassed by him. 3) By order dated 21 November 2022 this Court had issued notices to the Respondents. Office report indicates that notices have duly been served upon Respondent Nos.1, 2, 4 to 9, 10A to 10C and Page No. 1 of 3 2 February 2026 2026:BHC-AS:5361 Megha 9_WP_13589_2022.docx 11. Report further indicates that Respondent No.3 is dead but his legal heirs are Respondent Nos.1 and 2, who are already on record. None has appeared on behalf of the Respondents despite being duly served. Accordingly, I decided to hear the Petition on merits. 4) It appears that sole Plaintiff in the Suit has expired on 26 December 2016. Legal heirs awaited issuance of death certificate, which was issued on 23 March 2017. Immediately thereafter Application at Exhibit-43 was filed on 25 July 2017 for bringing legal heirs of the deceased Plaintiff on record. On the same day, another application at Exhibit-44 was filed for setting aside abatement. Since there was delay in filing application for setting aside abatement, the Petitioners filed a separate application at Exhibit-51 for condonation of delay. 5) Perusal of the impugned order would indicate that the learned Trial Judge has adopted hyper-technical approach in holding that the Application for condonation of delay ought to have been filed with Applications at Exhibits- 43 and 44. The delay in filing Application for bringing legal heirs on record and for setting aside the abatement was insignificant and ought to have been condoned by the Trial Court for the purpose of ensuring further carriage of the Suit to its logical conclusion on merits. The Reasons adopted by the Trial Court while rejecting the Applications do not appeal to this Court. The impugned order is indefensible and liable to be set aside. 6) The Petition accordingly succeeds. Order dated 25 July 2022 is set aside. The applications preferred at Exhibits-43, 44 and 51 are made absolute in terms of the prayers made therein. Page No. 2 of 3 2 February 2026 Megha 9_WP_13589_2022.docx 7) Writ Petition is allowed in above terms. There shall be no order as to costs. [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.] Page No. 3 of 3 2 February 2026 Signed by: Megha S. Parab Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 03/02/2026 12:05:42