Bombay High Court
CAO/1039/2026 of RATANIBAI WD/O BENIPRASAD AGRAWAL AND OTHERS Vs SHAKUNTALA WD/O RAMCHANDRA MAHAJAN AND OTHERS on 9 October 2026
1039-26 IN THE HIGH COURT OF
1/2 9 cao 1039-26
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CIVIL APPLICATION (CAO) NO. 1039 OF 2026
IN
MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION ST. NO.21143 OF 2026
AND
MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION ST. NO.21143 OF 2026
IN
SECOND APPEAL ST NO. 13597 OF 2025
Ratanibai Beniprasad Agrawal and ors. Vs. Shakuntala Ramchandra Mahajan and ors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders.
or directions and Registrar's orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ms. Bhavya Dhruv, counsel for the Applicants.
CORAM : MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.
DATE : 09/10/2026
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.
2. The applicants have filed the present applications seeking condonation of delay of 55 days in filing the application for restoration of Second Appeal Stamp No. 13597 of 2025 and to restore the appeal.
3. The learned counsel for the applicants submits that the Second Appeal was filed through e-filing and, as per the status reflected on the website, the appeal was approved. The applicants were, therefore, under the impression that no office objections remained to be complied with. However, objections were raised by the Registry, but the applicants Kavita 1/2 9 cao 1039-26 failed to notice the same. Subsequently, the learned counsel for the applicants noticed the list of office objections. The Registrar (Judicial) had passed a conditional order directing the applicants to remove the office objections within a period of 14 days. As the objections were not removed within the stipulated period, the appeal came to be dismissed. The learned counsel submits that the applicants came to know about the dismissal subsequently, resulting in a delay of 55 days in filing the application for restoration.
4. Considering the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 55 days is condoned and the appeal be registered to it's original number and stage.
5. The civil applications stand disposed of accordingly. SECOND APPEAL ST NO. 13597 OF 2025 The appellants shall remove the office objections within a period of two weeks from the date of restoration of the appeal.
JUDGE Kavita Signed by: Kavita P Tayade Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 09/10/2026 18:45:20