Bombay High Court
Shree Lalit Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. vs Shree Khodiyar Textiles Mills Pvt.Ltd. on 20 November, 2025
Author: Abhay Ahuja
Bench: Abhay Ahuja
904. IAL 35929-25 in S 316-94 @Connected Matters.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 35929 OF 2025
IN
SUIT NO. 316 OF 1994
Shree Lalit Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. ...Applicant
In the matter between
Shree Khodiyar Textiles Mills Pvt. Ltd. ...Plaintiff
V/s.
Shree Lalit Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. ...Defendant
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 7073 OF 2025
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 7072 OF 2025
Mr.Akash Rebello with Mr. Premlal Krishnan, Mr. Nadeem Shama, Ms.
Rehmat Lokhandwla and Mr. Siddharth Seshadri i/b Pan India Legal
Services LLP for the Applicant.
CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J.
DATE : 20th NOVEMBER, 2025
P.C. :
Interim Application No. 7072 of 2025
1. This Interim Application seeks a stay on the effect and operation
of the exparte judgment dated 21st April, 2014 and the decree dated 9th
April, 2018 passed by this Court in Suit No. 316 of 1994.
2. Mr. Rebello, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant submits
that in fact this Interim Application has been filed seeking orders of this
Court pending the hearing of the Interim Application (L) No. 35929 of
2025 seeking setting aside of the exparte judgment dated 21 st April,
904. IAL 35929-25 in S 316-94 @Connected Matters.doc
2014 and the decree dated 9th April, 2018 under Order IX Rule 13 of
the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (the "CPC").
3. Mr. Rebello submits that the urgency in the matter has arisen in
view of the fact that the auction with respect to the Applicant's
property situate at Grace Gardens, Faridabad, admeasuring 5078.12 sq.
yards, Revenue estate of Mouja Mewla, Maharajpur, Faridabad amongst
other properties, which had been attached by the Executing Court is to
be put up for auction on 24 th November, 2025. Mr. Rebello submits that
the exparte judgment dated 21 st April, 2014 and the decree dated 9 th
April, 2018 ought to be set aside in view of the following two grounds:-
(i) that no writ of summons has ever been received by the Applicant at
any of its addresses be it the registered office or the factory or the sales
office, although the judgment records that the Applicant was duly
served. Mr. Rebello points out that the registered office of the Applicant
is and has been the M/s Shree Lalit Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. 13-6, Delhi
Mathura Road, Faridabad (Haryana) and the sales office at 13/6, Delhi
Mathura Road, Faridabad, Haryana, sector address being Banquet
Premises, Plot No. 17, Sector 27B, Delhi Mathura Road, Faridabad,
Haryana-121003.
904. IAL 35929-25 in S 316-94 @Connected Matters.doc
(a) Drawing this Court's attention to the address of the Applicant viz.
the Defendant in Suit No. 316 of 1994 from a copy of the certified copy
of the Plaint in the said Suit, Mr. Rebello submits that although it has
been stated in the impugned judgment that writ of summons has been
served, the same was not served on the Applicant/Defendant in as
much as the address in the cause title of the Plaint as well as in the
exparte judgment is 13/66, Delhi Mathura Road and not 13/6, Delhi
Mathura Road. Mr. Rebello submits that the legal notice that was sent
to the Applicant/Defendant by the Plaintiff by registered post on 28 th
June, 1993, which was received by the Applicant/Defendant clearly
indicates the address of the Applicant/Defendant as 13/6 and not
13/66, Delhi Mathura Road, Faridabad (Haryana). Mr. Rebello submits
that therefore, obviously the writ of summons was not served upon the
Applicant/Defendant and that, therefore, this Court at least stay the
operation of the impugned exparte judgment dated 21 st April, 2014 and
decree dated 9th April, 2018 till the application under Order IX Rule 13
of the CPC for setting aside the impugned judgment and decree is
heard and decided.
(ii) Mr. Rebello has submitted that on another count also the
impugned judgment and decree ought to be set aside and for the time
being stayed in much as on the date of institution of the Suit in the year
904. IAL 35929-25 in S 316-94 @Connected Matters.doc
1994, which the Plaintiff was well informed and aware of, that the
Applicant/Defendant was declared a sick industrial unit under the Sick
Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (Now repealed)
(the "SICA") and that under Section 22 of the said Act, no Suit for
recovery of money or for enforcement of any security could have been
filed or proceeded with except with the consent of the Board for
Industrial and Financial Reconstruction ("BIFR") or the Appellate
Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction ("AAIFR"). Mr.
Rebello submits that the Applicant/Defendant became a Sick Unit
under Section 3(1)(o) of the SICA after the reference was made to the
BIFR in the year 1990-91 and draws the attention of this Court to page
79 of the Interim Application in support.
(a) Mr. Rebello has also tendered across the bar order dated 2 nd May,
1997 of the AAIFR to submit that the order of the BIFR dated 3 rd
September, 1996 opining the winding up of the Applicant/Defendant
under Section 20(1) of the SICA was confirmed by the AAIFR by order
dated 2nd May, 1997 and that, therefore, at least until that day the
Applicant/Defendant was a Sick Unit and the legal proceedings against
the said Applicant would have been in suspension. However, what Mr.
Rebello emphasizes is that under Section 22 of the SICA, once an
904. IAL 35929-25 in S 316-94 @Connected Matters.doc
inquiry under Section 16 is pending against any industrial company or
any scheme referred to under Section 17 is under preparation or where
an appeal under Section 25 relating to an industrial company is
pending, then notwithstanding anything contained in any law, no suit
for recovery of money etc. shall lie or be proceeded with further. Mr.
Rebello submits that if the reference has been made in the years 1990-
91, then in view of Section 22 of the SICA, the Suit against the
Applicant/Defendant could not have been instituted in the year 1994.
(b) Mr. Rebello submits that since the writ of summons was not
received as pointed out earlier, as an incorrect address has been
mentioned in the Plaint and obviously the same address would have
been mentioned in the writ of summons as well, there was no occasion
for the Applicant/Defendant to point out the same to the Court which
passed the exparte judgment in the Suit No. 316 of 1994. Mr. Rebello
submits that consequently being unaware of the exparte judgment,
there was no occasion to point this out to the decree department of this
Court, which drew up the decree dated 9th April, 2018.
4. Mr. Rebello submits that despite service of the Applications upon
the original Plaintiff/Respondent herein, none is appearing on behalf of
904. IAL 35929-25 in S 316-94 @Connected Matters.doc
the Respondent/original Plaintiff and tenders across the bar an affidavit
of service dated 19th November, 2025.
5. A perusal of the said affidavit indicates that scanned copies of the
Applications have been sent to the email ID of the original Plaintiff at
[email protected], which is the email address available in the
master data of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs with respect to the
Plaintiff. It has also been stated in the said affidavit that although an
attempt was made to serve the physical copies on the original Plaintiff's
various addresses, the same were not successful. That even an
endeavour was made to serve the Director Mr. Purshottamdas
Mahajibhai Patel, on his mobile number on whatsapp, however, there
has been no response to the message and upon calling the number, the
same is coming switched off.
6. Mr. Rebello submits that one of the properties put up under
auction viz. the Banquet hall and lawn situate in Faridabad at Grace
Gardens admeasuring 5078.12 sq. yards, Mauja Mewla, Maharajput,
Faridabad, which has been attached by the Executing Court, is a
property which is let out for wedding by the Applicant. That end of the
year is a peak wedding season in North India and the Applicant has
904. IAL 35929-25 in S 316-94 @Connected Matters.doc
taken several bookings from the month of November, 2025 to March,
2026. Mr. Rebello submits that the banquet hall and lawn is the only
source of income for the managing director of the Applicant and his
family that consist of three widows including his mother and two
sisters-in-law, who live in the property and that the auction scheduled
for the 24th November, 2025 would cause serious harm and prejudice to
them.
7. Mr. Rebello, however, fairly submits that earlier efforts before the
Executing Court as well as the Punjab and Haryana High Court to stay
the auction proceedings have not met with any success and draws this
Court's attention to the order dated 28 th October, 2025 and in particular
to paragraph 9 thereof to submit that since the Punjab & Haryana High
Court has held that the executing Court cannot go behind the decree,
even if it is alleged that the decree was obtained by fraud, the proper
remedy available to the aggrieved party is to approach to the same
Court which passed the decree, seeking its setting aside by filing
appropriate proceedings under the CPC and not to invoke the
jurisdiction of the execution Court for such purposes.
904. IAL 35929-25 in S 316-94 @Connected Matters.doc
8. Mr. Rebello submits that it is in this view of the matter that the
Application under Order IX Rule 13 of the CPC viz. Interim Application
(L) No. 35929 of 2025 and this Interim Application in the meanwhile
for staying the operation of the judgment dated 21 st April, 2014 and
the decree dated 9th April, 2018 has been filed before this Court.
9. I have heard the learned Counsel for the Applicant at sufficient
length today and I am of the view that a prima facie case has been
made out for ad-interim relief.
10. While the Respondent who despite having been served, is not
represented today, may file reply to the Applications, within a period of
three weeks with copy to the other side, rejoinder to the same in two
weeks thereafter with copy to the other side, in view of the submissions
and grounds made out as above, the judgment dated 21 st April, 2014
and the decree dated 9th April, 2018 are stayed until the next date.
11. List on 8th January, 2026.
(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)
