ANJUM E FAIZE SHABBIR AND ORS vs GORGINA ALIAS JEENA ALIAS JEANE Advocate - EVENTA ANDREA GONSALVES — WP/4351/2026

Case under Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 Section NA. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 23rd April 2026.

CNR: HCBM010162612026

CASE DISPOSED

Filing Number

WP/9396/2026

Filing Date

01-04-2026

Registration No

WP/4351/2026

Registration Date

04-04-2026

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

OTHERS ( 99 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

23rd April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 Section NA

Petitioner(s)

ANJUM E FAIZE SHABBIR AND ORS

Adv. J Sagar Associates

MUSTANSIR ABDULLA LOKHANDWALA

HAKUMUDDIN MISTER S/O EBRAHIM MISTER

ISMAIL EBRAHIM SAIFY S/O EBRAHIM SAIFY

JUZER ASGAR CHAHWALA S/O ASGAR CHAHWALA

HIS HOLINESS DR. SYEDNA MUFFADDAL SAIFUDDIN

Respondent(s)

GORGINA ALIAS JEENA ALIAS JEANE Advocate - EVENTA ANDREA GONSALVES

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDEEP V. MARNE

10-04-2026

FOR CIRCULATION

23-04-2026

FOR CIRCULATION

Orders

23-04-2026
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDEEP V. MARNE

Case Summary: WP/4351/2026 The Bombay High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a Small Causes Court order that dismissed a plaint amendment application. The core issue was whether the suit was maintainable when filed by delegate attorneys (Plaintiffs 2-5) rather than the sole trustee (Petitioner No. 6) directly. Justice Sandeep V. Marne held that Plaintiff No. 3 possessed valid delegated authority under Powers of Attorney executed by Petitioner No. 6, making the objection to his authority unfounded. The court directed Petitioner No. 6 to file an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC for his direct impleadment as Plaintiff within 2 weeks, with the trial court to decide expeditiously by 30 June 2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP/4351/2026 The Bombay High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a Small Causes Court order that dismissed a plaint amendment application. The core issue was whether the suit was maintainable when filed by delegate attorneys (Plaintiffs 2-5) rather than the sole trustee (Petitioner No. 6) directly. Justice Sandeep V. Marne held that Plaintiff No. 3 possessed valid delegated authority under Powers of Attorney executed by Petitioner No. 6, making the objection to his authority unfounded. The court directed Petitioner No. 6 to file an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC for his direct impleadment as Plaintiff within 2 weeks, with the trial court to decide expeditiously by 30 June 2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Explore other courts

Search Another Case