Gujarat High Court
Kalpeshbhai Madhusudhanbhai Bhatt vs Board Of Registrars Nominees Rajkot on 29 January, 2024
Author: Sangeeta K. Vishen
Bench: Sangeeta K. Vishen
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/21788/2023 ORDER DATED: 29/01/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 21788 of 2023
======================================
KALPESHBHAI MADHUSUDHANBHAI BHATT
Versus
BOARD OF REGISTRARS NOMINEES RAJKOT
======================================
Appearance:
MR ARSHAD SHAIKH(11761) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR MOHAMMEDABRAR M VALIYANI(11764) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2,2.1
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2.2,2.3,3
MR. TARAL B THAKER(14135) for the Respondent(s) No. 4
======================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN
Date : 29/01/2024
ORAL ORDER
With the consent of learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties, the matter is taken-up for final disposal.
Though respondent nos.1 to 3 have been duly served, chose
not to appear.
2. The challenge in the present writ petition is the
judgment dated 21st October, 2023, passed by the learned
Board of Nominees, Rajkot in Summary Lavad Case no.121 of
2023. Being aggrieved, the captioned writ petition.
3. Mr. Arshad Shaikh, learned advocate for the petitioner
has submitted that an order dated 20th September, 2023, was
passed, granting conditional leave to defend and the
petitioner, was directed to deposit 33.5% of the total
outstanding amount. Accordingly, the petitioner, gave post-
dated cheque which, was accepted by the bank. However, it
appears that the respondent bank had approached the Board
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/21788/2023 ORDER DATED: 29/01/2024
undefined
of Nominees, and on 21st October, 2023, the impugned
judgment has been passed. As per the direction contained in
the award, the property, i.e. residential house of the
petitioner, was likely to be attached. The petitioner had no
option, but to approach this Court in view of non-availability
of the Tribunal. This Court, was pleased to grant stay in
favour of the petitioner and issued notice and protected the
petitioner.
4. Mr. Taral B. Thaker, learned advocate for the
respondent No.4, in response to the notice issued by this
Court, has entered appearance. The grievance was raised that
that it is not true that the petitioner, was not afforded an
opportunity; however, the petitioner, did not avail the
opportunity. So far as the payment of cheque is concerned, it
is submitted that as per the direction, the petitioner, was to
deposit the amount on or before 20th October, 2023; however,
post-dated cheque of 25th November, 2023 was issued, which
was not in conformity with the direction contained in order
dated 20th September, 2023. The petitioner, was to deposit the
amount on or before 20th October, 2023 and not thereafter.
Since, there was non-compliance, suit came to be decreed
against the petitioner and in favour of the respondent bank. It
is urged that let the petitioner first comply with the order
dated 20th September, 2023 and only thereafter, indulgent be
shown.
5. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties.
6. During the course of hearing, the petitioner had shown
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/21788/2023 ORDER DATED: 29/01/2024
undefined
inclination to deposit the amount of Rs.7 lac, i.e. 33.5% of the
total outstanding and today, the amount, has been transferred
through RTGS in favour of the Gondal Nagrik Sahakari Bank
Ltd, i.e. the respondent no.4.
7. Pertinently, the order dated 20th September, 2023,
passed by the learned Board of Nominees, granting
conditional leave to defend, though belatedly, is complied
with. Notably, the order impugned has been passed without
there being any opportunity to the petitioner and since the
payment is made, the interest of justice would be served if the
petitioner is afforded an opportunity to defend his case before
the learned Board of Nominees.
8. Hence, on this limited ground, the judgment dated 21 st
October, 2023, passed in Summary Lavad Case no.121 of
2023, is quashed and set aside.
9. The Summary Lavad Case no.121 of 2023, be restored to
its original file. The matter is remitted and let the learned
Board of Nominees after hearing all the concerned parties;
pass order and hearing of suit be expedited.
10. With the above, petition is partly allowed. No order as to
costs. Direct service permitted.
(SANGEETA K. VISHEN, J.)
AMAR RATHOD...
