Dhaval Anand Shah vs Rupali Rishi Thakkar — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Dhaval Anand Shah vs Rupali Rishi Thakkar — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned orders quashed and set aside with the consent of counsel; the Decree Holder's application for issuance of arrest warrant restored to the Executing Court; Petitioner/Judgment Debtor directed to appear on 4th April 2026 and file a reply within one week; Executing Court requested to decide the application afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing, preferably within four weeks; Respondents at liberty to file an additional affidavit.

Issue for consideration

Whether the orders dated 14th January 2026 and 26th February 2026 passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court, Mumbai in Execution Application No.0100361 of 2024, issuing a warrant of arrest against the Petitioner under Order 21 Rule 30 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, are liable to be quashed and set aside.

Court's answer

Having regard to the nature of the orders passed by the Executing Court, and with the consent of the learned counsel for the Respondents, the impugned orders issuing the warrant of arrest are quashed and set aside.

Ratio / Principle

The application filed by the Respondent/Decree Holder for issuance of arrest warrant stands restored to the file of the Executing Court.

Key takeaways

The Petitioner/Judgment Debtor shall appear before the Executing Court on 4th April 2026 and file a reply to the application for issuance of the warrant of arrest within one week thereafter.ratio¶27
The Executing Court is requested to decide the application for issuance of the arrest warrant afresh, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, and preferably within a period of four weeks thereafter.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY (N. J. Jamadar, J.) — Writ Petition No. 3715 of 2026 with Writ Petition No. 3716 of 2026, decided 02 April 2026 (Dhaval Anand Shah v. Mayuri Vivek Thakkar and another): The petitioners challenged orders dated 14th January 2026 and 26th February 2026 of the learned Judge, City Civil Court, Mumbai in Execution Application No.0100361 of 2024, whereby a warrant of arrest was issued against the petitioner/judgment debtor under Order 21 Rule 30 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Having regard to the nature of the orders passed by the Executing Court, and with the consent of the learned counsel for the respondents, the impugned orders were quashed and set aside. The decree holder's application for issuance of the arrest warrant was restored to the file of the Executing Court. The petitioner/judgment debtor was directed to appear before the Executing Court on 4th April 2026 and file a reply to the warrant application within one week thereafter. The Executing Court was requested to decide the application afresh, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible and preferably within four weeks. The respondents were permitted to file an additional affidavit. Petitions stood disposed.

21-WP-3715-2026.DOC

Ajit

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 3715 OF 2026

Dhaval Anand Shah Versus Mayuri Vivek Thakkar

...Petitioner

...Respondent

WITH

WRIT PETITION NO. 3716 OF 2026

Dhaval Anand Shah ...Petitioner Versus Rupali Rishi Thakkar ...Respondent

Mr. Rohit Agarwal a/w Pratik Barot and Angel Pandey, for the Petitioner.

Mr. Vijay Vaghela, for the Respondent.

CORAM: N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATE : 02^nd APRIL 2026

P.C.:

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The challenge in this petition is to the orders dated 14^th January

2026 and 26^th February 2026 passed by the learned Judge, City Civil

Court, Mumbai in Execution Application No.0100361 of 2024, whereby a warrant of arrest came to be issued against the Petitioner under the provisions of Order 21 Rule 30 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

The Petitioner thereafter appeared before the learned Executing Court

1/2

21-WP-3715-2026.DOC

and sought a stay to the execution of the said warrant. However, the matter came to be adjourned to 4^th April 2026.

Having regard to the nature of the orders passed by the Executing Court, with the consent of the learned counsel for the Respondents, the impugned orders are quashed and set aside.

The application filed by the Respondent/Decree Holder for

issuance of arrest warrant stands restored to the file of the Executing Court.

The Petitioner/Judgment Debtor shall appear before the Executing Court on 4^th April 2026 and file a reply to the application for issuance of the warrant of arrest within one week thereafter.

The Executing Court is requested to decide the application for issuance of the arrest warrant afresh, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, and preferably within a period of four weeks thereafter.

The Respondents are at liberty to file an additional affidavit.

The petitions stands disposed.

[N. J. JAMADAR, J.]

2/2