Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 28524 (BOM)

THE DY ENGINEER NANDUR MADHMESHWAR CANAL DIVISION VAIJAPUR AURANGABAD THRO GMIDC AURANGABAD v. APPASAHEB MADHAVRAO BODHAK AND ORS

CA/3329/2025 · 2025-03-28

Shri Rohit W Joshi

Civil Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 915 to 918 and 922 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11785 OF 2024 IN FAST/26955/2023 The Executive Engineer Nandur Madhmeshwar Canal No 22 Thro Gmidc Aurangabad VERSUS Raosaheb Ambadas Solunke And Ors ... Ms. V. S. Swami h/f Mr. Mahesh Swami, Advocate for Applicant AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11793 OF 2024 IN FAST/26962/2023 The Executive Engineer Engineer Nandoor Madhmeshwar Canal No 22 Thero G M I D C Aurangabad VERSUS Akash Vilas Chandane Under Guardian Of Real Mother Sindhubai Vilas Chandane And Ors ... AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11794 OF 2024 IN FAST/26958/2023 The Executive Engineer Nandoor Madhmeshwar Canal No 22 Thro G M I D C Aurangabad VERSUS Kachru Hiralal Kumawat And Ors ... AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11795 OF 2024 IN FAST/27038/2023 The Dy.engineer, N.m.c.d.vaijapur Aurangabad Thr. G.m.i.d.c. Aurangabad VERSUS Ramesh Yadavrao Bodhak And Anr ... 2 915 to 918 and 922 AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3329 OF 2025 IN FAST/27034/2023 The Dy Engineer Nandur Madhmeshwar Canal Division Vaijapur Aurangabad Thro Gmidc Aurangabad VERSUS Appasaheb Madhavrao Bodhak And Ors ….. CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. DATED : 28TH MARCH, 2025 PER COURT :- . The registration of First Appeals Stamp Nos.26955 of 2023 with CA ST. No.26956 of 2023 and CA ST. No.26957 of 2023, FAST. No.26962 of 2023 with CA ST. No.26964 of 2023 and CA ST. No.26965 of 2023, FAST. No.26958 of 2023 with CA ST. No.26959 of 2023 and CA ST. No.26960 of 2023, FAST. No.27038 of 2023 with CA ST. No.27040 of 2023 and CA ST.27041 of 2023 and FAST. No.27034 of 2023 with C.A. No.27035 of 2023 and C.A. No.27036 of 2023 is refused vide order passed by the learned Registrar (Judicial) on account of failure on the part of the appellant to remove office objections. 2. Learned Counsel for the applicant makes a statement that all office objections will be removed within a period of two weeks from today. 3 915 to 918 and 922 3. In view of the statement made, the delay caused in filing the application for challenging the order is condoned and the order passed by the learned Registrar (Judicial) is quashed and set aside. However, it is clarified that in the event of office objections are not removed on or before 15.04.2025, the order dated 28.11.2023 shall stand revived. ( ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. ) Rushikesh/2025