Bombay High Court: While hearing a defamation suit by an elderly litigant, the Single Judge Bench of Jitendra Jain, J., directed that the present matter should neither be taken up for the next 20 years, i.e., 2046, nor be given priority on the ground that the petitioners are senior citizens or super senior citizens.
At the outset, the Court stated that the present matter exemplified the kind of ego-driven disputes between parties that spill into courts, continue even at the far end of their lives, and clog the system, thereby preventing the Court from taking up matters that truly require priority.
The Court had earlier suggested that an unconditional apology could have easily resolved the dispute. However, Plaintiff 1, despite being nearly 90 years old, persisted in pursuing the defamation suit. The Court stated,
“I do not wish to state anything further except that this matter should not be taken up for the next 20 years.”
The Court directed that the matter be listed only after 2046 and that no priority be accorded on the ground that the petitioners are senior or super senior citizens. The Court expressly reiterated that the matter shall not be taken up for hearing before 2046.
[Tarinibahen Desai v. Kilkilraj Bhansali, Suit No. 07 of 2017, decided on 28-4-2026]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the plaintiffs: Sanskruti Yagnik, Advocate
For the defendants: Pushkraj Deshpande a/w Anushtha Rathod i/by ALMT Legal for Defendants 1 to 4, 6 & 7
Nilesh Parte for Defendant 5
