Bombay High Court Judge Recalls Order Adjourning Defamation Suit Till 2046, Now Posts Matter For Hearing In July 2026
The Bombay High Court on Wednesday (April 29) recalled its order adjourning a defamation suit to the year 2046 citing that the parties reflected "ego fight", and adjourned the matter for further consideration on July 15, 2026.Notably, single-judge Justice Jitendra Jain, while passing the order on April 28, noted that the defamation suit could have been resolved earlier if the defendant...
The Bombay High Court on Wednesday (April 29) recalled its order adjourning a defamation suit to the year 2046 citing that the parties reflected "ego fight", and adjourned the matter for further consideration on July 15, 2026.
Notably, single-judge Justice Jitendra Jain, while passing the order on April 28, noted that the defamation suit could have been resolved earlier if the defendant had tendered an unconditional apology. However, the plaintiff, who is close to 90 years of age, continued to insist on pursuing the litigation.
“This is one of the matters where the ego fight between the parties at their fag end of their life clogs the system, which prevents the Court from taking up the matters which really requires more priority,” the judge observed in the order on April 28.
However, on Wednesday morning, advocate Swaraj Jadhav for the plaintiff mentioned the matter before the court seeking to modify the order.
"Not on board. On mentioning by Swaraj Jadhav, the counsel for the plaintiffs taken on production board for speaking to the minutes of the order dated April 28, 2026. Delete lines 4 and 5 of paragraph 2 of the order dated April 28, 2026 and replace paragraph 3 with 'List this matter on 15 July 2026 for further consideration'," Justice Jain said in the order passed on April 29. Justice Jain further ordered that the original order dated April 28, 2026 be corrected and the corrected order be uploaded on the website.
In the original order, the Court had recorded that on an earlier occasion it had indicated that the dispute could be settled through an unconditional apology. Despite this, the plaintiff persisted with the defamation claim. Expressing disapproval of the continued litigation, Justice Jain stated that he did not wish to add anything further except that the matter should not be taken up for the next 20 years.
Accordingly, the Court had directed that the suit be listed only after 2046 and expressly clarified that the case would not be given priority even on the ground that the parties are senior or super senior citizens.
Case Title: Tarinibahen Desai vs Kilkilraj Bhansali (Suit 07 of 2017)