Bombay High Court
WP/13978/2026 of MUZDMMI SHAFI SHAIKH Vs PREETAM RAMCHAND CHHUGANI ( DECEASED THRU HIS LEGAL HEIRS ) on 16 October 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 13978 OF 2026 Muzdmmi Shafi Shaikh ..Petitioner Versus Preetam Ramchand Chhugani (Deceased) Through His Legal Heirs Nirmala Preetam Chhugani and Anr …Respondents Mr. Ajay Bhise, for the Petitioner. CORAM: N. J.
11-WP-13978-2026.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 13978 OF 2026
Muzdmmi Shafi Shaikh
..Petitioner
Versus
Preetam Ramchand Chhugani (Deceased)
Through His Legal Heirs Nirmala Preetam
Chhugani and Anr
…Respondents
Mr. Ajay Bhise, for the Petitioner.
CORAM:
N. J. JAMADAR, J.
DATE :
16th OCTOBER 2026
P.C.:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard Mr. Ajay Bhise, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner.
2. The challenge in this Petition is to an order dated 28th September 2026 passed by the learned District Judge, Pune, rejecting an application for condonation of delay in filing the Appeal against the judgment and decree in SCS No. 1773 of 2011.
3. The proper remedy for the Petitioner is to file a Second Appeal against the impugned order.
4. The Petition stands dismissed with liberty to the Petitioner to file Second Appeal. ARS
11-WP-13978-2026.DOC
5. In the event the Second Appeal is filed and the question of limitation arises, the time spent by the Petitioner in prosecuting this Petition may be accounted for, under Section 14 of the Limitation Act. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.] ARS