Allowed

Rajinder Mehta v. Pranesh Gupta and 3 Ors.

Bombay HC23 Oct 2018APP/472/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay in two appeals allowed the setting aside of an impugned order in an execution application due to non-availability of referenced judgments. The matter was remanded to the executing court for a fresh hearing with an extended time period.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; execution application remanded to executing court for fresh hearing; time period extended by 15 days; pending notices disposed of.

Rajinder Mehta Vs Pranesh Gupta and 3 Ors. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2018)

DSS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL (L) NO. 442 OF 2018 IN SHERIEF'S REPORT NO. 71 OF 2018 IN EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 1091 OF 2015

¶4

Jagdish B. Khurana V/s.

¶5

Pranesh Gupta and ors.

¶6

… Appellant.

¶7

… Respondents.

¶8

WITH APPEAL (L) NO. 443 OF 2018 IN SHERIEF'S REPORT NO. 71 OF 2018 IN

¶9

EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 1091 OF 2015

¶10

Rajinder Mehta … Appellant. V/s. Pranesh Gupta and ors. … Respondents.

¶11

In APP(L) No. 442 of 2018

¶12

Mr. Vishal Kanade I/b Mr. V.V. Phadke for the Appellant.

¶13

Mr. Kishore Jain and Mr. Dileep Satale I/b Mr. J.S. Gaikwad for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2.

¶14

Mr. Mayur Khandeparkar a/w. Mr. Sumeet B. I/b L.J. Law for the Respondent No.3.

¶15

Mr. Satish Chitgopikar, Dy. Sheriff is present.

¶16

In APP(L) No. 443 of 2018

¶17

Mr. Mayur Khandeparkar a/w. Mr. Sumeet B. I/b L.J.Law for the Appellant.

¶18

Mr. Kishore Jain and Mr. Dileep Satale I/b Mr. J.S. Gaikwad for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2.

¶19

Mr. Satish Chitgopikar, Dy. Sheriff is present.

¶20

CORAM : A.S. OKA AND M.S. SONAK, JJ. DATE : 23^rd OCTOBER 2018.

DSS

P.C.:

1] Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶25

2] The learned counsel appearing for the 1^st and 2^nd respondents states that as the judgment and order dated 30^th August 2018 in Appeal Nos. 302 and 303 of 2018 and 303 of 2018 was not available on the date on which the impugned judgment and order was passed, the same could not be shown to the learned Single Judge. He has, therefore, no objection for setting aside the impugned order and for directing the learned Single Judge to decide the application dated 7^th September 2018 afresh.

¶26

3] Accordingly, we pass the following order:-

¶27

(a) The impugned order dated 11^th September 2018 in Execution Application No. 1091 of 2015 and Sheriff's Report No. 21 of 2017 is hereby set aside and the Execution Application along with Sheriff's Report and the Application dated 7^th September 2018 are remanded to the Executing Court;

¶28

(b) Considering the facts of the case, we are sure that the learned Single Judge will give necessary priority to the hearing of the matter;

¶29

(c) To enable the parties to apply, the period of 15 days fixed under clause (ii) of paragraph 18 of the judgment and order dated 30^th August 2018 in Appeal Nos.302 and 303 of 2018 is extended by a period of 15 days from the date on which this order is uploaded;

DSS

(d) It is not necessary to pass any order on Sheriff's Report No.73 of 2018 and the same shall be treated as disposed of;

¶33

(e) Pending Notices of Motion, if any, do not survive and the same are disposed of;

¶34

(f) All contentions on merits are kept open.

¶35

(M. S. SONAK, J.)

¶36

(A.S.OKA, J.)

Rajinder Mehta v. Pranesh Gupta and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajinder Mehta v. Pranesh Gupta and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Borouge Pte Ltd. Vs Multi Flex Lami Print Ltd.

Sohrab Tehmton Anklesaria Vs Feroza Sohrab Anklesaria

Apex Construction Vs Adarsh Water Parks and Resorts Pvt. Ltd. and 2 Ors.

Shri. Pravin Pandurang Kalbar and Ors. Vs the Tahesildar of Karveer and Ors.

Shri. Ramesh Dayaldas Tanwani and Ors. Vs the Tahesildar of Karveer and Ors.

Shri. Amitkumar Mahavir Gat and Ors. Vs the Tahesildar of Karveer Thru Gp High Court and Ors.