Bombay High Court
Niwara Cooperative Housing Society ... vs Vastukala Developers, Through Its Sole ... on 15 October, 2025
Author: Abhay Ahuja
Bench: Abhay Ahuja
30 ia 5714-25
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 5714 OF 2025
IN
EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 2465 OF 2024
Niwara Cooperative Housing Society Ltd(Prev. ... Applicant
Known As Bank Of Mh. Employees Co-Op. Hsg. Soc
Ltd.)
Versus
Vastukala Developers, through its Sole Proprietor ... Respondent
Mahendra B. Mhatre
...................
Mr. Nikhil N. Wadikar a/w. Mr. Kastur P. Patil i/by Mr. Nandu Pawar,
Advocates for the Applicant.
Mr. Tanmay Vispute, Advocate for the Respondent.
...................
CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J.
DATE : 15 OCTOBER 2025
P.C. :
1. This Interim Application has been filed by the Judgment-
Creditor-Society seeking police protection to the Bailiff for executing
warrant of attachment under Order XXI Rule 43 of Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 (CPC) for taking inventory of movable articles of the
Respondent-Judgment-Debtor and also attaching the same without
obstruction from the Respondent-Judgment-Debtor.
2. When the matter is called out, Mr. Wadikar, learned Counsel
30 ia 5714-25
appears for the Applicant-Judgment-Creditor and submits that the
execution application has been filed for execution of the Award dated
13th March, 2024 directing the Respondent-Judgment-Debtor to pay an
amount of Rs.4,81,67,610/- and cost of Rs.15,33,075/- with interest at
the rate of 12% p.a. on the respective amounts from the date of the
Award till realisation.
3. Mr. Wadikar, learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that
since no payments came through, therefore, the execution proceedings
have been taken out and accordingly warrant of attachment of movables
under Order XXI Rule 43 of CPC and warrant of attachment of
immovables under Order XXI Rule 54 of CPC was issued against the
Respondent on 25th October, 2024. The same was received by the
Sheriff's Office on November, 21, 2024. On December 16, 2024, Bailiff
assigned to the office of the Sheriff went to the address of the
Respondents to execute both the warrants.
4. The Bailiff has stated in his report dated 17th December, 2024
that the warrant of attachment under Order XXI Rule 54 of CPC in
respect of the movables has been executed and that the residential
premises viz. Jaiguru Bungalow, Road No.2, Pandurang Wadi, Goregaon
(E), Mumbai - 400063 (the "said premises") has been attached and that
the warrant has been executed by him on 16th December, 2024 by
proclaiming by beats of drum. However, it is stated in the report that the
30 ia 5714-25
warrant of attachment under Order XXI Rule 43 of the CPC has been
returned unexecuted as at the said premises in Goregaon, he met the
Respondent-Judgment-Debtor-Mahendra B. Mhatre, proprietor of the
Respondent and after he disclosed his identity and told his purpose of
the visit and showed the duplicate copy of the warrant, the said Mr.
Mhatre has not allowed him to take inventory of the movable articles
and has obstructed the execution of the said warrant and therefore the
warrant of attachment of the movables in the said premises could not be
executed.
5. Mr.Wadikar, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant has
submitted that the Respondent has obstructed a public servant from
fulfilling his duties without any legitimate right. Mr. Wadikar submits
that therefore, this Court may grant the assistance of the police officials
from Vanrai Police Station, Goregaon, Mumbai to accompany the Bailiff
to execute warrant of attachment under Order XXI Rule 43 of CPC so
that the Bailiff can take inventory of the movable articles in the said
premises.
6. Mr. Vispute, learned Counsel appears for the Respondent-
Judgment-Debtor and submits that the Application has not been
furnished to him and that some time may be granted after furnishing the
application, to file reply, however, also submitting that the Respondent-
Judgment-Debtor is present in Court.
30 ia 5714-25
7. Mr. Wadikar, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant
vehemently opposes the request for time and furnishes copy of the
application to learned Advocate Mr. Wadikar for the Applicant and
submits that if any time is granted, considering the conduct of the
Respondent-Judgment-Debtor, the movables at the said premises would
be displaced and there would be nothing left for the Bailiff to take
inventory and therefore this Court may not grant any time and allow the
Application.
8. I have heard the learned Counsel in the matter.
9. It is not in dispute that the Respondent-Judgment-Debtor owes
Rs.4,81,67,610/- and cost of Rs.15,33,075/- with interest at the rate of
12% p.a. to the Applicant. It is also not in dispute that no payment has
been made to the Applicant that there is no stay on the execution of the
Award. A perusal of the Bailiffs report as noted above clearly indicates
that the Respondent-Judgment-Debtor, who is present in Court has
obstructed the Bailiff from executing the warrant of attachment under
Order XXI Rule 43 of the CPC on 16 th December, 2024. The Bailiff has
sent a copy of the report to the Deputy Sheriff's Office on 4 th January,
2025. The entire factual data in the application and the annexures has
not been and cannot be disputed.
10. While ordinarily this Court would grant time in the matter
where applications are filed and time for reply is sought, however, this is
30 ia 5714-25
not a case where this Court deems it necessary to grant any time.
However, as and by way of abundant caution, this Court have inquired
with learned Advocate appearing for the Respondent-Judgment-Debtor
as to his client's response in the matter. Mr. Vispute, learned counsel
appearing for the Respondent-Judgment-Debtor after taking instructions
submits that his client the Respondent will facilitate the Bailiff to take
inventory of the movables lying at the said premises tomorrow i.e. on
16th October, 2025 at 11:00 a.m.
11. Since, the Respondent-Judgment-Debtor has himself agreed to
permit the Bailiff to take inventory tomorrow at 11:00 a.m. and to
execute the warrant of attachment under Order XXI Rule 43 of CPC, it
would not be necessary to pass any order in this Application at this
stage.
12. List on 17th October, 2025 on the supplementary board for the
report of bailiff.
13. Mr Mahendra B. Mhatre, the sole-proprietor of the
Respondent-Judgment-Debtor also to remain present in Court on the
next date.
14. All concerned to act on a copy of this order duly authenticated
by the learned Associate of this Court.
(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)
Signed by: Sanjay A. Mandawgad
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 15/10/2025 19:57:34
