Bombay High Court
Mehta Stores vs Poptlal L. Navlakhe And Ors on 16 June, 2023
Bench: Madhav J. Jamdar
902-904-wp-7108-7109-7110-2023.doc
Pallavi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.7108 OF 2023
Mehta Store
Through its Partner
Kantilal Indermal Mehta ...Petitioner
Versus
Popatlal Lalchand Navlakha and Anr. ...Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.7109 OF 2023
Prabhat Store
Through its Partner
Gunwantibai Mohanraj Mehta ...Petitioner
Versus
Popatlal Lalchand Navlakha and Anr. ...Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.7110 OF 2023
Mehta Store
Through its Partner
Kantilal Indermal Mehta ...Petitioner
Versus
Popatlal Navlakha and Anr. ...Respondents
Mr. A.S. Rao, i/b. C.M. Lokesh, for the Petitioners in
WP/7108/2023, WP/7109/2023 and WP/7110/2023.
Mr. Rajendra Sanghvi, for the Petitioners in WP/8842/2022, WP/
8843/2022 and WP/9154/2022.
CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATE : 16th JUNE, 2023
P.C.:
1. These Writ Petitions were heard on 14 th June 2023 and after
hearing the matter for some time when the Court expressed that there is
902-904-wp-7108-7109-7110-2023.doc
no substance in the Writ Petitions and are required to be dismissed, Mr.
Rao, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners requested the Court
not to dismiss the Writ Petitions on that day and stated that the parties
are likely to settle the dispute and requested to grant protection only for
two days. Therefore, the matter was adjourned to 16 th June 2023 and
protection was granted only till 16th June 2023 and it has been directed
that the same be shown under the caption of 'Settlement'.
2. It appears that on 15th June 2023, a circulation praecipe was
moved before another learned Single Judge who has been assigned the
Rent Act matters of even years regarding Writ Petition No.8842 of 2022,
Writ Petition No.8843 of 2022 and Writ Petition No.9154 of 2022. It has
been informed by the office that in the said praecipe along with above-
mentioned Writ Petitions of even years, the above Writ Petitions of odd
years were also mentioned. However, as the Writ Petitions pertaining to
the odd years of the Rent Act matters are assigned to this Court and as
per this Court's order dated 14th June 2023 the above Writ Petitions
were adjourned to 16th June 2023 before this Court, office put up these
matters before this Court.
3. It is significant to note that the present Petitioners are the
obstructionist and the Petitioners in the said Writ Petition No.8842 of
2022, Writ Petition No.8843 of 2022 and Writ Petition No.9154 of 2022
where Mr. Sanghvi represents the Petitioners are the Judgment Debtors.
902-904-wp-7108-7109-7110-2023.doc
Mr. Rao, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners in Writ Petition
No.7108 of 2023, Writ Petition No.7109 of 2023 and Writ Petition
No.7110 of 2023 has informed the Court that he has expressly told
Advocate Rajendra Sanghvi on 14 th June 2023 that the above matters
were heard and as it was expressed by the Court that as the Petitioners
are obstructionist and there is nothing to indicate that the Petitioners
have got independent right, title and interest, the Court is inclined to
dismiss the matter and therefore, he has sought stay only for two days
so that the efforts be made to settle the dispute.
4. Thus, it is clear that Mr. Sanghvi, learned Advocate appearing for
the Petitioners in the said Writ Petitions with complete knowledge that
this Court has granted very limited protection, moved the matters
before another learned Single Judge so as to obtain order of stay on the
basis of orders passed in these Writ Petitions and in any case, moved
these Writ Petitions before another learned Single Judge for
continuation of relief granted only for two days by this Court for above
reasons.
5. It is further significant to note that the praecipe filed for clubbing
all the 6 Writ Petitions dated 5th June 2023 was placed before the
Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice and the Hon'ble the Acting Chief
Justice had directed that all the above Writ Petitions be clubbed
together and the same be placed before the learned Single Bench taking
902-904-wp-7108-7109-7110-2023.doc
up Civil Writ Petitions of 'Odd Years' as per the roster. As per the roster,
Civil Writ Petitions of Odd Years are assigned to this Court.
6. Therefore, it is clear that the conduct of Advocate Sanghvi of
mentioning the above Writ Petitions of even years before another
learned Judge for stay with complete knowledge of order dated 14 th
June 2023, prima facie, amounts to interference in the administration of
justice. It is significant to note that this Court has completely heard Mr.
Rao, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners on 14 th June 2023.
Mr. Rao, learned counsel when this Court was dismissing the Writ
Petitions, requested to grant protection only for two days on the ground
that parties are likely to settle the dispute. It is significant to note that
Advocate Sanghvi represents the Petitioners who are tenants and the
decree of eviction passed against them was confirmed upto the Supreme
Court. The present Petitioners represented by Advocate Rao i/by
Advocate C.M. Lokeshappa are the obstructionists. The Court has
recorded finding that the Petitioners i.e. obstructionists have no
independent right, title and interest. It is the contention of the
Respondents that the Petitioners represented by Advocate Sanghvi i.e.
Tenants and the partners of present Petitioners i.e. obstructionists
represented by Advocate Rao are close relatives and the obstructionist
proceedings are filed in collusion with each other.
902-904-wp-7108-7109-7110-2023.doc
7. Therefore, it is clear that an attempt has been made to mention
the matters before another learned Single Judge so that order dated 14 th
June 2023 passed by this Court could be shown to the learned Single
Judge for continuation of the protection granted by this Court by order
dated 14th June 2023 and also getting protection in other matters by
completely suppressing that this Court was dismissing the said Writ
Petitions and only at the request of Mr. Rao, learned counsel protection
of two days was granted.
8. Thus, it is very clear that Mr. Rajendra Sanghvi, learned Advocate
has prima facie, interfered with the administration of justice. However,
as Mr. Sanghvi has tendered unconditional apology and as his age is 76
years, I am restraining myself from issuing any contempt notice. Mr.
Sanghvi voluntarily states that he will pay cost of Rs.25,000/- to the
Kirtikar Law Library by Monday.
9. For the above reasons, order dated 14 th June 2023 granting
protection of two days is recalled and said protection is forthwith
vacated. It is made clear that no interim order is now operating in all
these Writ Petitions.
10. Stand over to 20th June 2023. To be shown 'First on
Supplementary Board'. Advocate Sanghvi to remain personally present
in the Court.
902-904-wp-7108-7109-7110-2023.doc
11. To be placed along with WP/8842/2022, WP/8843/2022 and
WP/9154/2022.
[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
