Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10395 (BOM)

ASHOK MARUTI KARPE v. MISHRIMAL RIKABCHANDJI JAIN

IA/7381/2026 · 2026-09-22

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Gitalaxmi 18-IA-7381-2026.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 7381 OF 2026 IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION (STAMP) NO. 19490 OF 2024 ASHOK MARUTI KARPE ...APPLICANT IN THE MATTER BETWEEN : ASHOK MARUTI KARPE ...PETITIONER Versus MISHRIMAL RIKABCHANDJI JAIN ...RESPONDENT Mr. Sagar Gala i/b Mr. Rajesh P. Chheda, learned counsel for the Applicant/Petitioner. Ms. Divya D. Jain, learned counsel for the Respondent. CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. DATE : 22nd SEPTEMBER, 2026. Per Court : 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the matter was simultaneously placed before two Courts, i.e. Shri. Justice M. M. Sathaye as well as Shri. Justice N. J. Jamadar on 18th June, 2025. The matter before Shri. Justice M. M. Sathaye was not 22nd SEPTEMBER, 2026 Gitalaxmi 18-IA-7381-2026.docx taken up on account of paucity of time and the matter was adjourned on 8th July, 2025. However, in the same matter, Shri. Justice N. J. Jamadar has passed an order that ‘in the event the Applicant does not furnish copies of the application for service on the Respondent within a period of 3 weeks, the application would stand dismissed without further reference to the Court’. 3. Unfortunately two inconsistent orders came to be passed as the same application, which was listed before two Courts on 18th June, 2025. The Petitioner failed to furnish copies of the application, as directed within a period of 3 weeks and the application was dismissed. 4. Considering the peculiar facts of this case that the matter was simultaneously placed before two Courts and two inconsistent orders came to be passed, the Applicant has reasonable cause. 5. Learned counsel for the Respondent opposes the present interim application for restoration. 6. Considering this aspect of the matter, the order passed on 8th July, 2025 by Shri. Justice N. J. Jamadar is recalled. The application bearing Interim Application No. 11690 of 2024 for condonation of delay is restored. 7. Liberty is granted to the Respondent to file reply to Interim Application No. 11690 of 2024. 22nd SEPTEMBER, 2026 Gitalaxmi 18-IA-7381-2026.docx 8. The present Interim Application No. 7381 of 2026 is allowed and Interim Application No. 11690 of 2024 for condonation of delay in filing Civil Revision Application (Stamp) No. 19490 of 2024 be listed for hearing on 5th October, 2026. [ ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. ] 22nd SEPTEMBER, 2026 GITALAXMI KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR Digitally signed by GITALAXMI KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR Date: 2026.09.23 11:05:16 +0530