MUMBAI: A day after posting to the year 2046, a decade-old Rs 20 crore defamation suit filed by a SoBo senior citizen after she insisted on pursuing it and was disinclined to accept an apology from defendants, Bombay high court recalled that part of its order and posted the matter to July 15, 2026. The dispute allegedly arose in a housing society located in Breach Candy about a decade ago. On Wednesday, Justice Jitendra Jain, sitting singly, recalled its April 28 direction to hear the libel suit only after 2046 and posted it for next hearing on July 15. Advocate Swaraj Jadhav for the 90-year-old woman mentioned the matter for modification. Justice Jain also heard advocate Pushkaraj Deshpande from ALMT Legal for erstwhile housing society members of Shyam Niwas, located in Breach Candy and said, “Delete lines 4 and 5 of paragraph 2 of order dated 28 April 2026 and replace para 3 with “List this matter on 15 July 2026 for further consideration.” The deleted lines from Tuesday’s order are: “I do not wish to state anything further except this matter should not be taken up for next 20 years.” And the para 3 that stands replaced had said: “list this matter after 2046. At any cost, this matter should not be given priority on the ground that the petitioners are senior citizens or super senior citizens. It is expressly made clear that this matter will not be taken up for hearing before 2046.” These lines and this para now stand deleted.The HC had on April 20 requested both sides to try and settle saying the matter could be worked out with defendants giving an unconditional apology. When the matter came up for hearing as scheduled on Tuesday, erstwhile housing society committee members from whom the Rs 20 crore damages are being claimed, offered to unconditionally apologise, without prejudice. However, the woman almost 90 still insisted on pursuing the matter, HC had noted on Tuesday.The dispute was over collection of funds towards repair and maintenance of the society. She had objected to the collection and had failed to make payment of the amount demanded. Subsequently, in the minutes of one of the Extra Ordinary General Meetings (EGM), the woman was referred to as a “defaulter,” which led to the filing of the present suit alleging defamation. “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 HC had also said in its Tuesday order.
