The High Court allowed two cross appeals arising from an order under Section 9A of the CPC. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the court set aside the impugned order without examining the merits of the underlying suit.
Appeals allowed; impugned order under Section 9A CPC quashed and set aside; suit to proceed on merits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Digitally signed by LAXMIKANT LAXMIKANT GOPAL GOPAL CHANDAN CHANDAN Date: 2023.07.24 12:20:06 +0530 (903&904) APP-180.17&APP-52.19.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
APPEAL NO. 180 OF 2017
IN
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1469 OF 2014
IN
SUIT NO.1015 OF 2014
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.798 OF 2018
IN
APPEAL NO.180 OF 2017
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.946 OF 2017
IN
APPEAL NO.180 OF 2017
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2319 OF 2023
IN
APPEAL NO.180 OF 2017.
Fizzah Navnitlal Shah : Appellant W/o. Navnitlal Ratanji Shah (Orig. Defendant No.2)
versus
Chetan Navnitlal Shah and ors. : Respondents.
ALONG WITH
APPEAL NO.52 OF 2019
IN
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1469 OF 2014
IN
SUIT NO.1015 OF 2014
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2320 OF 2023
IN
APPEAL NO.52 OF 2019
1 of 3
lgc
(903&904) APP-180.17&APP-52.19.doc Chetan Navnitlal Shah : Appellant/Original Respondent/ Plaintiff. Versus Fizzah Navnitlal Shah W/o Navnitlal Ratanji Shah and ors. : Respondents.
Mr. Rashmin Khandekar with Ms. Kirtida Chandarana and Mr. Naozad Golwalla i/by Mr. Mahernosh Humranwala for the Appellant in Appeal No.180 of 2017 and for Respondent No.1 in Appeal No.52 of 2019.
Mr. Pradeep Sancheti, Senior Advocate, a/w Mr. Shayan Dasgupta, Ms. Nidhi Kulkarni, Mr. Devendra Orak and Ms. Khushboo Bhatt i/by Khaitan & Co. for the Appellant in Appeal No. 52 of 2019 and for Respondent No. 1 in Appeal No.180 of 2017.
CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR, ACTING CJ. & ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.
DATED : 20 JULY 2023.
P.C. :
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
consent.
2 of 3
lgc
(903&904) APP-180.17&APP-52.19.doc
legal position laid down in the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court firstly in the case of Nusli Neville Wadia v/s. Ivory Properties and ors.1 and subsequent decisions, the last being the decision of the Appeal Bench of this Court in the case of Sabita Rajesh Narang v/s. Sandeep Gopal Raheja and others,2 that the impugned order would be a nullity and will have to be set aside and thereafter suit will have to be proceed on its own merits.
(ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.)
(ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)
1(2020) 6 SCC 557
22023 SCC OnLine 846
3 of 3
lgc
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeals filed under Section 9A of the Code of Civil Procedure should be disposed of as they arise from an impugned order.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Nusli Neville Wadia v/s. Ivory Properties and ors.Referred¶4
Nusli Neville Wadia v/s. Ivory Properties and ors.
Sabita Rajesh Narang v/s. Sandeep Gopal Raheja and othersReferred¶4
Sabita Rajesh Narang v/s. Sandeep Gopal Raheja and others
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Fizzah Navnitlal Shah
Chetan Navnitlal Shah
NITIN JAMDAR
ARIF S. DOCTOR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court