Gujarat High Court
Deputy Engineer, Uttar Gujarat Vij ... vs Vaghela Gitaba Mahendrasinh on 14 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/9456/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9456 of 2025
==========================================================
DEPUTY ENGINEER, UTTAR GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD. & ORS.
Versus
VAGHELA GITABA MAHENDRASINH & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR CHINMAY M GANDHI(3979) for the petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3
MS RUMI M GANDHI(3472) for the petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT
Date : 14/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Advocate, Mr. Chinmay M. Gandhi, for the petitioners.
2. The present writ application is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:-_ "A) Your Lordships may be pleased to admit and allow this petition; B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari and/ or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 04.04.2025 passed below Exh.4 in Regular Civil Appeal No.22/2024 by the learned Additional District Judge Sabarkantha at Idar (Annexure-C and be further pleased to remand the matter to the learned Appellate Court for hearing the stay application afresh, in the interest of justice;
C) Pending admission, hearing and/or final disposal of this petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to stay the further proceedings of the Execution Petition No.12/2024 pending before the learned trial court, in the interest of justice.
Page 1 of 6 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon Jul 14 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 14 22:44:05 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/9456/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined D) Such other and further reliefs as Your Lordships may deem just, fit and expedient be granted in favour of the petitioners. E) Costs of this petition be provided for to the petitioners."
3. At the outset, learned Advocate, Mr. Gandhi, would submit that after the passing of the decree by the Trial Court, the petitioner has carried the matter before the Appellate Court by filing Regular Civil Appeal No. 22 of 2024, which was admitted but despite the fact that the entire decretal amount has been deposited by the petitioner, a stay has been refused by the Appellate Court based on certain observations made, which will definitely affect the interest of the petitioner. 3.1. Learned Advocate, Mr. Gandhi, would submit that if the amount deposited by the petitioner is withdrawn by the Respondent-Original Plaintiff, the Appeal filed by the petitioner becomes infructuous. So, the need arose on the part of the petitioner to file the present application.
4. This Court could have issued notice to the respondents and passed an order after hearing them. But, considering the Page 2 of 6 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon Jul 14 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 14 22:44:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/9456/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined fact that the Plaintiffs are from the poorer strata of society, and to safeguard the interests of both sides, at this stage, this Court will not issue any notice to the respondents.
5. Prima facie, the Appeal filed by the petitioner is admitted by the Appellate Court. The petitioner has already deposited the entire decretal amount with the Trial Court. The Appellate Court could have put certain conditions upon the respondents- Original Plaintiffs if they wished to withdraw such amount but, having not done so and having refused an injunction against the impugned judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court, the Appeal filed by the petitioner will become infructuous if the respondents-Plaintiffs withdraw the entire decretal amount deposited by the petitioner.
6. Apart from that fact, certain observations made by the Appellate Court while refusing the injunction are uncalled for. Had it been a case that there was no merit in the Appeal of the petitioner, the Appellate Court could have decided the Appeal itself while rejecting the injunction application, which was not done so.
Page 3 of 6 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon Jul 14 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 14 22:44:05 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/9456/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined
7. It is unfathomable that, on the one hand, the Appellate Court has fixed the Appeal for final hearing and, on the other hand, refused an injunction against the money decree passed by the Trial Court, wherein the petitioner-Appellant has deposited the entire decretal amount.
8. In view of the aforesaid, the following order is passed:-
8.1. The order dated 04.04.2025 passed by the learned Third Additional Sessions Judge, Sabarkantha at Idar, below Exhibit 4 in Regular Civil Appeal No. 22 of 2024 is hereby suspended till the final disposal of Regular Civil Appeal No. 22 of 2024.
8.2. The amount, which has been deposited by the petitioner, lying with the Trial Court, shall be invested in a Fixed Deposit Receipt, initially for a period of one year, which may be extended from time to time till the disposal of the aforesaid Appeal.
8.3. The FDR shall be invested in the name of Plaintiff No. 1 - Vaghela Gitaba Mehendrasinh but the original FDR shall Page 4 of 6 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon Jul 14 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 14 22:44:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/9456/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined be kept in the custody of the Nazir till the disposal of the aforesaid Appeal by the Appellate Court. 8.4. Plaintiff No. 1 - Vaghela Gitaba mehendrasinh shall be entitled to receive the quarterly interest accrued on such FDR.
This interest shall not be recoverable from the Plaintiffs, irrespective of the outcome of the Appeal. 8.5. Nonetheless, if the petitioner ultimately succeeds in the Appeal, or any reduction in the decretal amount, after giving such adjustment, the amount lying in the FDR shall be returned to the petitioner.
8.6. If, ultimately, the petitioner defeats in its Appeal, the amount lying in the FDR shall be paid to the Plaintiff. An appropriate order in that regard shall be passed by the Appellate Court while finally adjudicating the Appeal. 8.7. It goes without saying that the Appellate Court is required to decide the aforesaid Appeal filed by the petitioner without being influenced by its order dated 04.04.2025 and shall decide it in accordance with the law. Page 5 of 6 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon Jul 14 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 14 22:44:05 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/9456/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined
9. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the present application is hereby partly allowed to the aforesaid extent. No order as to costs.
10. This Court is conscious of the fact that the aforesaid direction has been issued without issuing notice to the respondents. If the respondents are aggrieved by the aforesaid direction issued by this Court, it is open for the respondents to file an appropriate application before this Court within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
(MAULIK J.SHELAT,J) MOHD MONIS Page 6 of 6 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon Jul 14 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 14 22:44:05 IST 2025