SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(SC) 436

B. R. GAVAI, SANDEEP MEHTA
Vijay Laxman Bhawe Since Deceased Through His Legal Heirs – Appellant
Versus
P & S Nirman Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Mukul Rohatgi,Sr.Adv. Mr. Shyam Divan,Sr.Adv. Ms. Sonia Mathur,Sr.Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ankur Saigal, Adv. Mr. Anurag Gharote, Adv. Ms. Aanchal Mullick, Adv. Mr. Uday Aditya Banarjee, Adv. Mr. Kartikeya Desai, Adv. Ms. S. Lakshmi Iyer, Adv. Mr. Shashwat Patnaik, Adv. Mr. Rajesh K. Satpalkar, Adv. Mr. Divik Mathur, Adv. Ms. Sukriti Bhatnagar, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Aryama Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Mr. Dama Seshadri Naidu, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ardendumauli Prasad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Dilip Annasaheb Taur, AOR Mr. Amol V Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vishwajeet Kapse, Adv. Mr. Shivaji M. Jadhav, AOR Mr. Brij Kishor Sah, Adv. Ms. Apurva, Adv. Mr. Adarsh Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Vigneshd Singh, Adv. Mr. Anand Dilip Landge, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv. Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv. Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv. Ms. Preet S. Phanse, Adv. Mr. Adarsh Dubey, Adv. Mr. Ajit Bhasme, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Visen, AOR Mr. Parth Sarathi, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Joshi, Adv. Mr. Ravindra Vikram Singh, Adv.

1. Leave granted.

2. The present appeal challenges the judgment dated 14th December 2022, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (for short, “High Court”) in Civil Revision Application No. 269 of 2022, whereby the High Court dismissed the revision application filed by the appellants herein, challenging the order dated 4th May 2022, passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Thane, (for short, “trial court”) in Civil Misc. Application No. 1473 of 2021, which was filed by respondent No. 1 herein, for condonation of delay in filing of the application for restoration, and seeking thereby to restore the Special Civil Suit No. 269 of 2002, which came to be dismissed for want of prosecution by the trial court on 3rd November 2011.

3. Vide an order dated 24th April 2023, this Court issued notice to the respondents and stayed the proceedings before the trial court.

4. Shorn of details, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under:

4.1 The present appeal is concerned with certain lands situated at Sonkhar Village, in Taluka and District Thane, Maharashtra (hereinafter referred to as “suit land”). There are competing claims with respect to the ownership of the suit land.

4.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top