Bombay High Court
Vithu D. Redkar (Since Deceased) vs Suresh Arjun Bandekar And 18 Ors on 13 August, 2025
2025:BHC-GOA:1509
2025:BHC-GOA:1509
37 WP 333-2025
Jose
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
WRIT PETITION NO.333 OF 2025
1. Mr. Vithu D. Redkar (Since deceased)
72 years of age,
1(a) Mrs. Sheetal Tulshidas Mapari,
age 65 Years, housewife,
Married to Mr. Tulshidas Mapari
R/o. Maithan Vaddo, Assonora,
Bardez Goa.
1(b) Mr. Ramchandra Vithu Redkar
S/o Vithu Redkar,
age 62 Years, Married to
Mrs. Rashmi Ramchandra Redkar,
1(c) Mr. Narayan Vithu Redkar,
S/o Vithu Redkar, age 50 Years, service,
Married to Mrs. Namita Narayan Redkar,
1(d) Mr. Santosh Vithu Redkar,
S/o Vithu Redkar, age 48 Years, service,
1(e) Mr. Sanjay Vithu Redkar,
S/o Vithu Redkar, age 45 Years, service,
1(f ) Ms. Sangita Vithu Redkar,
S/o Vithu Redkar, age 42 Years, service,
1(g) Mr. Sandeep Vithu Redkar,
S/o Vithu Redkar, age 40 Years, service,
Page 1 of 11
13th August, 2025
::: Uploaded on - 14/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 14/08/2025 21:51:46 :::
37 WP 333-2025
1(h) Mr. Pradesh Vithu Redkar.
S/o Vithu Redkar,
38 years of age, service,
All residents of H. No. 225 Bandekar
Vaddo, Morjim, Goa. ... Petitioners.
Versus
1. Mr. Suresh Arjun Bandekar
son of Arjun Bandekar
age 76 years, married, retired,
R/o H. No. 178, Bandekar waddo,
Pernem-Goa.
2. Mr. Gurudas Devidas Asgaonkar,
son of Devidas Asgaonkar
age 80 Years, married, retired
R/o H.No.168, Bandekar waddo,
Pernem, Goa.
3. Mr. Bhalchandra Narayan Bandekar.
son of Narayan Bandekar,
age 75 years, married, retired
R/o H. No. 193-A
Bandekarwada, Morjim,
Pernem, Goa,
4. Mr. Vithal Mahadev Tiloji,
son of Mahadev Tiloji,
age 75 Years, married,
unemployed
R/o. Bandekar Waddo,
Morjim, Pernem, Goa.
5. Mr. Anand R. Bandekar,
son of Rajaram Bandekar
age 59 years, married, service,
R/o H. No. 176. Bandekar waddo,
Page 2 of 11
13th August, 2025
::: Uploaded on - 14/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 14/08/2025 21:51:46 :::
37 WP 333-2025
Morjim, Pernem-Goa.
6. Mr. Sachidanand D. Asgaonkar,
son of Dattaram Asgaonkar
age 45 years, unmarried, service,
R/o H. No. 168, Bandekar waddo,
Morjim, Pernem-Goa.
7. Mr. Prasad Gangaram Pednekar, (Since
Deceased),
Through Legal heirs.
7(a). Smt. Laxmi Gangaram Pednekar (Since
deceased)
Through Legal heirs.
7(a)(i). Mr. Nilesh Gangaram Pednekar,
Son of Gangaram Pednekar,
age 50 years, unmarried, service,
R/o. H.No.182, Bandekar Vaddo,
Morjim, Pernem Goa
7(a)(ii). Ms. Chaya Gangaram Pednekar,
D/o. Gangaram Pednekar,
age 55 years, unmarried, unemployed
R/o. H. No. 182, Bandekar Vaddo,
Morjim, Pernem Goa.
7(a)(iii). Mrs. Shubhangi Prakash Govekar.
W/o. Prakash Govekar
age 45 years. married, housewife
her husband.
7(a)(iv) . Mr. Prakash Govekar,
son of Rajaram Govekar,
age 50 Years, married,
Page 3 of 11
13th August, 2025
::: Uploaded on - 14/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 14/08/2025 21:51:46 :::
37 WP 333-2025
Both R/o H.No.96, Raia,
Siolim, Bardez Goa.
7(a)(v) Mrs. Manish Mangesh Bandekar,
W/o. Mangesh Bandekar,
age 65 years, married, housewife,
And her husband,
7(a)(vi) Mr. Mangesh Bandekar,
son of Gopal Bandekar
age 73 years, service,
Both R/o H.No.205, Bandekar Vaddo,
Morjim, Pernem Goa.
7(a)(vii) Mr. Devidas Gangaram Pednekar,
S/o. Gangaram Pednekar,
age 62 years, married and his wife,
7(a) (viii) Mrs. Surangi Devidas Pednekar.
W/o. Devidas Pednekar,
age 60 years, housewife,
Both r/o. H.No. 182 Bandekar vaddo,
Morjim, Pernem Goa.
7(a)(ix). Mr. Krishna Gangaram Pedenkar,
Son of Gangaram Pednekar,
Age 64 Years, Married, service,
R/o. H. No. 182 Bandekar Vaddo,
Morjim, Pernem Goa.
8. Mr. Mukund Yeshwant Bandekar,
Son of Yeshwant Bandekar
age 60 Years, married, business,
R/o H. No. 195, Bandekar Wada,
Morjim, Pernem-Goa
Page 4 of 11
13th August, 2025
::: Uploaded on - 14/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 14/08/2025 21:51:46 :::
37 WP 333-2025
9. Mr. Balkrishna Prabhakar Kambli (Since
Deceased).
9(a). Mrs. Vandana Balkrishna Kambli,
W/o. Balkrishna Prabhakar Kambli,
age 45 years, married, housewife,
R/o. H.No. 203, Bandekar Wada,
Morjim, Pernem Goa
10.Mr. Mahadev Nana Bandekar,
s/o Nana Bandekar, age 65 years,
business, married,
R/o H.No.205, Bandekar Wada,
Morjim, Pernem-Goa.
11.Mr. Prakash Kashinath Bandekar.
s/o Kashinath Bandekar,
age 65 years, service, married,
R/o H.No. 175, Bandekar Wada,
Morjim, Pernem-Goa,
12. Mr. Ashok Uttam Bandekar. (Since
deceased).
12(a). Mrs. Anita Ashok Bandekar.
w/o Ashok Bandekar, age 58 Years.
12(b). Mr. Shubham Ashok Bandekar.
S/o Ashok Bandekar,
age 27 Years, service,
12(c). Mr. Akshay Ashok Bandekar,
s/o Ashok Bandekar age 24 Years, service,
All r/o H.No. 187/A, Bandekarwadda,
Morjim, Pernem Goa.
Page 5 of 11
13th August, 2025
::: Uploaded on - 14/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 14/08/2025 21:51:46 :::
37 WP 333-2025
13.Mrs. Rukmini V. Redkar,
w/o Vithu Redkar, age about 75 years,
R/o. H.No.225, Bandekar Vaddo,
Morjim, Goa
14. Mr. Krishna D. Redkar (Since Deceased)
Major of age
Through legal Heirs
(a) Mrs. Urmila Laxman Gadekar,
Mayor of age
(b) Mr. Laxman Arjun Gadekar,
major of age
Both r/o. Belabai, Vasco, Goa.
(c) Mrs. Shivani Shivanand Naik,
Major of age
(d) Mr. Prakash Krishna Redkar,
Major of age
(e) Mrs. Priya Prakash Redkar,
Major of age
R/o. Bandekar Wada, Morjim,
Pernem, Goa.
(f ) Mrs. Geeta Gurudas Mandrekar,
Major of age
(g) Mr. Gurudas Guna Mandrekar,
Major of age
Both r/o. Caisuva, Anjuna, Bardez, Goa.
(h) Mr. Laxmikant Krishna Redkar,
Major of age
Page 6 of 11
13th August, 2025
::: Uploaded on - 14/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 14/08/2025 21:51:46 :::
37 WP 333-2025
R/o. Morjim, Pernem, Goa.
15. Mr. Rama Babani Tandel (Since
deceased).
(a). Mrs. Radhika Rama Tandel,
W/o. Rama Tandel, age 60 years,
housewife,
(b). Mrs. Jayashree Rama Tandel,
D/o. Rama Tandel, age 45 years
married, housewife,
(c) Mrs. Rupali Rama Tandel.
D/o. Rama Tandel. 40 years of age,
married, housewife,
(d). Mrs. Roshani Rama Tandel,
D/o. Rama Tandel, 38 years of age,
married, housewife,
(e). Mrs. Rakshita Rama Tandel.
D/o. Rama Tandel, 35 years of age,
married, housewife,
(f ). Mrs. Ratisha Rama Tandel,
D/o. Rama Tandel, 32 years of age,
married, housewife.
All R/o. House No. 173,
Bandekarwada, Morjim,
Pernem Goa,
16. Mr. Bablo Laxman Wadji (Since
deceased).
(a) Mr. Vinayak Bablo Wadji.
son of Bablo Wadji, age 60 Years,
married, business, Married to
Page 7 of 11
13th August, 2025
::: Uploaded on - 14/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 14/08/2025 21:51:46 :::
37 WP 333-2025
Mrs. Vidhya V. Wadji,
(b) Mr. Prakash Bablo Vadji,
son of Bablo Vadji age 65 Years,
married to Mrs. Pratima P. Wadji.
(c) Mr. Kalidas Bablo Wadji.
son of Bablo Wadji, age 60 years,
service, Married to Mrs. Smita K. Wadji,
(d) Mrs. Praful Prabhakar Shirodkar,
w/o Prabhakar Shiodkar,
age 50 years, married, housewife,
(c) Mrs. Sugandi Vithal Vengurlekar,
W/o Vithal Vengurlekar age 45 years,
married housewife,
(f ) Mrs. Shobha Sainath Zalmi,
W/o Sainath Zalmi age 42 years,
married, housewife,
(g) Mrs. Chandralekha Ashok Naik,
W/o Ashok Naik. age 42 years,
married, housewife,
All r/o H. No. 137. Naroji Wada,
Morjim, Pernem-Goa
17.Mr. Mangesh Namdev Taral.
son of Namdev Taral.
age 59 years, married, service
R/o H. No.201, Bandekar waddo,
Morjim, Pernem-Goa.
18.Mr. Sitaram Jaganath Bandekar,
son of Jaganath Bandekar.
Page 8 of 11
13th August, 2025
::: Uploaded on - 14/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 14/08/2025 21:51:46 :::
37 WP 333-2025
age 50 years, married, service,
R/o H. No. 174 Bandekar waddo,
Morjim, Pernem-Goa.
19.Mr. Hari Sada Naik,
son of Sada Naik, age 65 years,
retired, R/o H.No. 162
Bandekarwadda,
Morjim, Pernem, Goa. ... Respondents.
Mr. Manoj Jalmi, Advocate for the Petitioners.
Mr. K.T. Sawant, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1, 3, 5 to 8 and 12.
CORAM: VALMIKI MENEZES, J.
DATED: 13th August, 2025
ORAL JUDGMENT:
1. Registry to waive office objections and register the matter.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the
parties, petition is disposed of finally.
3. The challenge in this petition is to an order dated 03.06.2025 of
the Court of the Additional District Judge-3, North Goa passed in
RCA No. 76/2024. By the impugned order, the District Court has
rejected the application filed by the Original Respondent Nos.1(a) to
1(h)/Petitioners herein i.e. Plaintiffs in the original suit bearing RCS
No.17/2011, seeking enlargement of time under Section 151 CPC to
carry out amendment to the cause title of the original plaint. The suit
was partly decreed against which the present Respondent Nos.1 to 12
13th August, 2025
37 WP 333-2025
have filed an appeal. From the record, it appears that by an order of
09.05.2025, the District Court had condoned delay on an application
filed by the said original Respondent Nos.1(a) to 1(h) for carrying out
amendment to the cause title in the plaint, and to correct the record
in the plaint to enter the names of legal representatives of original
Respondent No.3/original Plaintiff No.3. Time of 10 days was
granted to carry out amendment to the cause title.
4. In the aforementioned order, the District Court makes
reference to a Judgment of this Court in Rukmini Dattatreya Naik
vs. Parmanand Lalchand Joshi reported in (2000) 4 ALL MR 758
Bom, wherein it has been held that an amendment to the cause title
is not an amendment to the pleadings, and such amendment may be
carried out either by any of the parties or by the Court establishment
on its own. This being the situation, the Registry of the Civil Court
dealing with the suit would have carried out the amendment on its
own.
5. Since the time limit was set down in the order of 09.05.2025,
the Petitioners filed an application at Exhibit D-16 seeking extension
of enlargement of time granted by the District Court to carry out the
aforementioned amendment to the cause title of the plaint, which
came to be rejected only on the count that an affidavit was not filed by
the learned Advocate for the party who moved the application to
substantiate the allegation that the concerned file had not been given
to the Advocate for carrying out the amendment. This, in my opinion,
13th August, 2025
37 WP 333-2025
may not be sufficient ground to reject such an application, in the light
of the law laid down by this Court, to the effect that amendment to
the cause title could well be carried out by the Registries of the Courts
themselves. These are ministerial acts and parties need not be saddled
with filing of applications to enlarge time on such grounds.
6. Consequently, the impugned order is quashed and set aside.
The learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioners submits that he
will carry out the amendment to the cause title of the original plaint
filed in RCS No. 17/2011 within a period of 15 days from today. It is
reported that the Records and Proceedings of RCS No. 17/2011 have
now been called for and are in possession of the Registry of District
Judge-3. The dealing hand of the Registry of District Judge-3 shall
provide the concerned file of RCS No. 17/2011 to the Advocate for
the Petitioner who shall effect the amendment within the timeline set
up above. Considering the fact that notice had to be issued to the
Respondents in this matter, and there is some amount of negligence
on the part of the Petitioner in carrying out the amendment on their
own, costs of Rs.10,000/- are awarded to the Appellants before the
District Court. Costs may be deposited in the Registry of the District
Court within 15 days from today and may be released by the learned
District Judge to the Appellants under its orders.
7. Rule is made absolute in the above terms.
VALMIKI MENEZES, J.
13th August, 2025
