AMIT KANTILAL LUNKAD AND ANR vs AZIZ VAZIR KHAN AND ORS — WP/4854/2026

Case under Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 Section NA. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 29th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM010145432026

Filing Number

WP/8409/2026

Filing Date

24-Mar-2026

Registration No

WP/4854/2026

Registration Date

10-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. Marne

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. Marne

Bench Type

Single

Category

RENT ACT ( 34 )

Sub-Category

INTERIM ORDER/AD-INTERIM ORDER PASSED IN RENT ACT MATTERS ( 12 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

29-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 24-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 Section NA

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.AMIT KANTILAL LUNKAD AND ANR

    Adv. SIDDHARTH SUTARIA

  2. 2.AMOL KANTILAL LUNKAD

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.AZIZ VAZIR KHAN AND ORS

  2. 2.NAZIR VAZIR KHAN

  3. 3.USMAN VAZIR KHAN

  4. 4.RIYAZ VAZIR KHAN

  5. 5.AYYUB VAZIR KHAN

  6. 6.DAWOOD VAZIR KHAN

  7. 7.YUSUF VAZIR KHAN

  8. 8.SULEMAN VAZIR KHAN

  9. 9.TAYYAB VAZIR KHAN

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-Jun-2026

    For Circulation

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. Marne

  3. 29-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. MarneView PDF

    Summary The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petitions filed by defendants Amit Kantilal Lunkad and another, who sought to challenge the District Court's rejection of their delay condonation applications. The defendants, who defaulted on rent payments and failed to appear during trial, filed appeals 280 days late against eviction decrees. The court found their justifications—including mental trauma, financial constraints, and family hardship—vague and unsupported by documentary evidence, and noted that as renowned builders with litigation experience, they could have easily filed appeals timely. The court upheld the District Court's dismissal, emphasizing the defendants' negligent conduct both during trial and post-decree, and found no merit in the petitions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. MarneView PDF

  5. 15-Apr-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 24-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/4854/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petitions filed by defendants Amit Kantilal Lunkad and another, who sought to challenge the District Court's rejection of their delay condonation applications. The defendants, who defaulted on rent payments and failed to appear during trial, filed appeals 280 days late against eviction decrees. The court found their justifications—including mental trauma, financial constraints, and family hardship—vague and unsupported by documentary evidence, and noted that as renowned builders with litigation experience, they could have easily filed appeals timely. The court upheld the District Court's dismissal, emphasizing the defendants' negligent conduct both during trial and post-decree, and found no merit in the petitions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case