Anusayabai Laxman Bondre vs Prayagbai Kailas Chhavan — 9/2024
Case under Limitation Act Section 5. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED / REJECTED AFTER FULL TRIAL / HEARING on 18th March 2026.
Civil M.A. - Civil Misc. Application
CNR: MHWS010000862024
e-Filing Number
19-01-2024
Filing Number
59/2024
Filing Date
19-01-2024
Registration No
9/2024
Registration Date
23-01-2024
Court
District and Sessions Court, Washim
Judge
1-Principal District and Sessions Judge, Washim
Decision Date
18th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED / REJECTED AFTER FULL TRIAL / HEARING
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Anusayabai Laxman Bondre
Adv. GAIKWAD SUDHARSHAN GAJANAN
Respondent(s)
Prayagbai Kailas Chhavan
Devanand Laxman Bondre
Gayabai Shantiram Bhosale
Yamunabai Kisanrao Kadam
Kamalabai Babanrao Devkar
Yamunabai Vishnu Bondre
Ankush Vishnu Bondre
Radhika Vishnu Bondre
Ganesh Vishnu Bondre
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District and Sessions Judge, Washim
Disposed
Order
Order
Hearing
Hearing
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 17-03-2026 | Order |
| 16-03-2026 | Order |
| 12-03-2026 | Hearing |
| 26-02-2026 | Hearing |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Civil MA No. 9/2024 Anusayabai sought condonation of delay (2513 days) to restore an appeal dismissed in default on 15/04/2017. She alleged her son Devanand misled her by claiming the appeal was pending while colluding with the opposing party. The court rejected her application, finding she failed to establish "just and sufficient cause." The court noted that Anusayabai herself actively participated in the original trial, filed written statements, and was aware of execution proceedings filed in 2022, undermining her claim of ignorance. The judgment emphasized that parties must diligently pursue their cases and that long inaction demonstrates negligence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Civil MA No. 9/2024 Anusayabai sought condonation of delay (2513 days) to restore an appeal dismissed in default on 15/04/2017. She alleged her son Devanand misled her by claiming the appeal was pending while colluding with the opposing party. The court rejected her application, finding she failed to establish "just and sufficient cause." The court noted that Anusayabai herself actively participated in the original trial, filed written statements, and was aware of execution proceedings filed in 2022, undermining her claim of ignorance. The judgment emphasized that parties must diligently pursue their cases and that long inaction demonstrates negligence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts