✦ Bombay High Court · 11 Aug 2026

IA.1727.2023.odtIN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAYCIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPURCIVIL APPELLATE v. Mariuam Mahamadali Shaikh

Case at a glance

Outcome

Dismissed

The Family Court Appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution

Judgment

IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAYCIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPURCIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTIONINTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1727 OF 2023INFAMILY COURT APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 31970 OF 2022Mahamadali A. Vahab Shaikh...ApplicantVersusMariuam Mahamadali Shaikh...RespondentWITHINTERIM APPLICATION (STAMP) NO. 31972 OF 2022INFAMILY COURT APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 31970 OF 2022*** Mr. Balaji P. Shinde i/b Ms. Kavita P. Shinde, Advocate for the Applicant. Ms. Seema Dighe (Through V.C.) i/b Adv. Sarda, Advocate for the Respondent.***CORAM:RAJESH S. PATIL ANDABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.DATE :17 AUGUST, 2026.P. C. : 1.On 11 August 2026, the following order was passed in the present proceeding :“1.Mr. Balaji Shinde, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that after filing of this Family Court Appeal, his client is not in touch with him. Therefore, he does not have any instructions in the present Family Court Appeal. He submits that there is a delay in filing this appeal hence, an application for condonation of Shrikant MalaniPage 1 of 2

delay has been filed.2.Ms. Seema Dighe, learned counsel appearing for the respondent – wife submits that there are two sons born out of the wedlock of the applicant with the respondent and both the sons are in her custody. There was an order of maintenance Rs. 10,000/- per month and as of today, there are arrears of Rs. 5,00,000/-3.Stand over to 17 August 2026 matter to come up under the caption for “Dismissal”.”2.Mr. Balaji Shinde, learned counsel, submits that the Advocate-on-Record has already communicated to the Applicant that the Advocate-on-Record is seeking discharge from the present proceeding.3.None appears for the Applicant when the matter is called out. Neither is the Applicant present in person. It appears that the Applicant has lost interest in pursuing the matter any further.4.The Family Court Appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution.5.In sequel, all interim applications stand disposed of.(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.)(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)Shrikant MalaniPage 2 of 2

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: The Family Court Appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution

Which court decided this case, and when?

Bombay High Court, on 11 Aug 2026. The bench was RAJESH S PATIL ANDABHAY MANTRI, ABHAY MANTRI, RAJESH S PATIL.

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Interim Application No. 1727 of 2023). ← Search more judgments