Shri. Natwar Nagjibhai Parekh (deleted Since Deceased) v. The Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai & Anr.
Judgment
Shri. Natwar Nagjibhai Parekh (deleted Since Deceased) Thr. L.R.S.1A) Mrs. Rasila Natvar Parekh ...Appellants Versus The Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai And Anr ...Respondents _______ Mr. Sahil Salvi a/w Mr. Manohar Shelar i/b Mr. Omar Khaiyan Shaikh for the Appellant. Mr. Jash Saigal i/b Mr. Piyush Shah for Respondent Nos. 2 & 3. Mr. Pradeep M. for Respondent-BMC. _______ CORAM DATE : : ARIF S. DOCTOR, J. 22nd JUNE, 2026 P.C.
This Court had on 27th January, 2026 passed the following order: “1. The learned counsel for the appellant and the respondents jointly seek time. This matter is of the year 2011. The Court has specifically kept this matter in the afternoon session for final hearing so that the old matters can be taken up and disposed of.
Inspite of the notice of the same, today the parties are not ready and seek time on some or the other grounds.
The matter is adjourned not at the behest of the the Court but at the behest of the parties and their advocates.
Let this matter come up for hearing in its regular course.”
2. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the paper book has been misplaced by the Appellant and thus seeks time. Areeb 58-FA-307-2011 (C).DOC
3. I do not find this to be sufficient ground to grant an adjournment, particularly in light of what has been recorded in the order extracted above. The Appellant had more than sufficient time since 27th January, 2026 to put its affairs in order.
4. It is therefore clear that the Appellant is not desirous of prosecuting the Appeal. The Appeal is accordingly dismissed for want of prosecution. [ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.] Areeb
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.