Bombay HC Refuses To Scrap ₹115.65-Crore Mithi River Project Suit Over Procedural Error

The Bombay High Court has refused to dismiss a ₹115.65-crore suit linked to the 2007 Mithi River widening project, ruling that filing the case in the joint venture’s name was a curable procedural defect. Justice Sandeep Marne said the two constituent companies could be added as plaintiffs and allowed the suit to proceed.

Add FPJ As a
Trusted Source
Bombay HC Refuses To Scrap ₹115.65-Crore Mithi River Project Suit Over Procedural Error
FPJ News Service Updated: Sunday, September 06, 2026, 11:31 PM IST
Bombay HC Refuses To Scrap ₹115.65-Crore Mithi River Project Suit Over Procedural Error

Bombay HC Refuses To Scrap ₹115.65-Crore Mithi River Project Suit Over Procedural Error | Representational Image

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has refused to dismiss a Rs 115.65-crore suit arising out of a 2007 Mithi River widening project, holding that filing the case in the name of a joint venture was a procedural defect that could be corrected.

Justice Sandeep Marne rejected an application seeking dismissal of the suit, observing that an error in naming the plaintiff cannot automatically result in rejection of the plaint when the law provides a mechanism to correct it.

The dispute relates to a contract awarded in March 2007 to the BPL-BBC Joint Venture for widening and deepening the Mithi River between Mahim Causeway and Dharavi Bridge.

The joint venture comprised two registered companies — Backbone Projects Ltd. (BPL) and Backbone Construction Pvt. Ltd. (BBC).

Following disputes during execution of the project, a commercial suit was filed in 2017 seeking recovery of over Rs 115 crore along with interest.

The application for rejection of the plaint argued that the joint venture was not an independent legal or juristic entity and could not institute proceedings in its own name. It contended that the suit should have been filed by the two constituent companies.

The contractor submitted that the suit had been filed in the joint venture’s name as a bona fide mistake, as the contract had also been executed under that name. It sought permission to formally bring the two companies on record as plaintiffs.

Justice Marne accepted the submission, noting that the Code of Civil Procedure empowers courts to correct errors relating to parties.

“If in every suit the plaint is to be rejected… upon finding that the suit is filed in the name of wrong plaintiff, power conferred upon the court under Order I Rule 10 of the Code would be rendered otiose,” the judge observed.

The court noted that both companies had been identified in the original plaint as members of the joint venture and held that the defect could be corrected.

It accordingly refused to reject the plaint.

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/

Published on: Monday, September 07, 2026, 01:27 AM IST

RECENT STORIES