Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, CJ, M. S. SONAK, RAVINDRA V. GHUGE
High Court of Judicature at Bombay on its own motion – Appellant
Versus
Nilesh Ojha – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Mr. Ghanshyam Upadhyay, the learned counsel appears for the respondent-contemnor. The learned counsel has apprised this Court that a petition has been filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court challenging the orders dated 17th September 2025 and 16th October 2025
2. Mr. Ghanshyam Upadhyay, the learned counsel seeks four weeks’ adjournment.
3. Post the matters on Thursday, that is, 15th January 2026 at 4:00 p.m.
The court has the inherent power to ensure compliance with its orders and can grant adjournments in the interest of justice while balancing expediency and the rights of the parties involved.
The Court has the discretion to grant adjournments and direct the Trial Court accordingly, especially in cases of counsel's indisposition.
Courts may grant adjournments in exceptional circumstances, such as medical reasons, but may also set limits on future adjournments.
The court ordered the adjournment of multiple interim applications, highlighting procedural requirements for submissions and scheduling.
The court has the discretion to grant adjournments and may set aside orders rejecting adjournment applications if the reasons for refusal are not justified.
Interim order is revived and extended by a period of ten days.
The court recognized the necessity of adjournment due to the petitioner's death, emphasizing procedural integrity in ongoing legal matters.
The court may grant an opportunity for adjournment considering the circumstances, such as late service of documents, with conditions to prevent abuse of the adjournment process.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
