Bombay High Court Defers Defamation Case To 2046, Says Senior Citizens’ Ego Clash Clogging The System

In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court has adjourned a defamation suit to 2046, terming it an ego fight between the parties, involving the 90-year-old woman (plaintiff) and a co-operative housing society (defendant) in Mumbai. Justice Jitendra Jain noted, “This is one of the matters where the ego fight between the parties at the fag end of their life clogs the system, which prevents the Court from taking up the matters which really require more priority.”

Highlighting that the judicial system is already burdened with a huge number of cases, this case only adds to the burden, as one of the parties doesn’t want to settle it. The court said there are more pressing cases to be heard and then deferred this case for the next 20 years, to be heard not before 2046.

“I do not wish to state anything further except that this matter should not be taken up for the next 20 years,” said the court.

The court also emphasised that this case should not be given priority just because the petitioners are senior or super senior citizens. Notably, the elderly woman insisted on continuing the case rather than settling it by accepting the apology from the defendant (cooperative housing society).

The court noted that an order was passed earlier in 2017 in this case, where the court had indicated that if the respondents provided an unconditional apology, the case could be settled. However, despite the erstwhile committee members of the society being ready to offer an unconditional apology in the April 2026 hearing, the elderly woman remained adamant about continuing the matter.

According to media reports, the dispute is related to a resolution passed in the annual general meetings in 2015, in which she was referred to as a defaulter. In response to this, the woman files the defamation suit against the housing society, seeking Rs 20 crore as the communication, including notices, letters, etc., from the society caused her mental harassment.

In 2018, the court, seeing no possibility of settlement, proceeded with the trial. In March 2025, the matter was listed for hearing in the court of a single-judge bench of Justice Abhay Ahuja, but none of the parties or their representation through advocates was present.

The matter dragged. The court adjourned the case till July 10 with a warning that if no one came to represent the elderly woman, it would dismiss the case.

The matter went on, and on April 28, the woman was represented by her advocate. The court then, in its one-page judgment, held, “List this matter after 2046. At any cost, this matter should not be given priority on the grounds 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.”