MISS. PRABHA GANPAT BORKAR NOW MRS PRABHA DINESH KANNAN vs DREGO ENTERPRISES MUMBAI AND ORS. — IA/2901/2026

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 96. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 15th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM010122052026

Filing Number

IA/7043/2026

Filing Date

10-Mar-2026

Registration No

IA/2901/2026

Registration Date

10-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh

Coram

Hon'ble Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh

Bench Type

Single

Category

FIRST APPEAL ( 53 )

Sub-Category

Against Order of Civil Court - Single Bench ( 7 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

15-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Last updated 25-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 96

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MISS. PRABHA GANPAT BORKAR NOW MRS PRABHA DINESH KANNAN

    Adv. Pragya Mishra

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.DREGO ENTERPRISES MUMBAI AND ORS.

  2. 2.FLUSHEL APARTMENTS CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LITD.

  3. 3.HORACE KEVIN GONSALVES

  4. 4.SHARON LILIAN GONSALVES

  5. 5.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Sharmila U. DeshmukhView PDF

    The Bombay High Court allowed the interim application and recalled the dismissal order of September 9, 2025, which had dismissed the First Appeal for non-removal of office objections. The court held that since it is the advocate's duty to remove office objections, the litigant cannot suffer for the advocate's default, and granted three weeks to cure the deficiency before listing the appeal for June 9, 2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 15-Apr-2026

    For Circulation

    Hon'ble Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh

  4. 10-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. IA/2901/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Bombay High Court allowed the interim application and recalled the dismissal order of September 9, 2025, which had dismissed the First Appeal for non-removal of office objections. The court held that since it is the advocate's duty to remove office objections, the litigant cannot suffer for the advocate's default, and granted three weeks to cure the deficiency before listing the appeal for June 9, 2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case