Gujarat High Court
Kalpesh Cotton Industries Pvt. Ltd vs Agricultural Produce Market Committee ... on 11 August, 2025
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1576/2024 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1576 of 2024
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12104 of 2015
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2023
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1576 of 2024
==========================================================
KALPESH COTTON INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.
Versus
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE - BOTAD & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR YUSUFKHAN PATHAN(3799) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR DIPAN DESAI(2481) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR RAXIT J DHOLAKIA, ADVOCATE FOR MR PRANAV G DESAI(290) for
the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.
JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY
Date : 11/08/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
1. This intra court appeal is filed by the trader/ original
respondent no.2 challenging the judgment and order dated
24.01.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in the writ
petition where the challenge was to the public notice dated
12.07.2015 issued by the respondent bank qua the goods/
cotton bales worth of Rs.1.10 crores confiscated by the
market committee [Agricultural Produce Market Committee -
'APMC'].
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1576/2024 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2025
undefined
2. The original prayers made in the writ petition as noted in
the judgment impugned indicate that the Agricultural Produce
Market Committee was raising a dispute with regard to the
sale of confiscated goods by the bank under the Secularization
and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of
Security Interest Act, 2002 [in short referred to as the
'SARFAESI Act']. In any case, there was no challenge by the
original respondent no.2/appellant herein about any
proceedings conducted by the respondent - bank or the APMC
before the writ Court. In fact, the writ Court had adjudicated
the dispute between the bank and the APMC as to who will
get priority over the sale proceeds of the confiscated goods.
3. In this scenario, the trader/ original respondent no.2
namely the appellant herein cannot be permitted to challenge
the correctness of the judgment and order dated 24.01.2023.
For any issue pertaining to renewal of license of the original
respondent no.2 or any recovery made by the bank while
conducting the sale of the secured assets or the money sought
to be realized by the APMC, it is open for the appellant herein
to avail statutory remedy available to him. In any case, the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1576/2024 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2025
undefined
correctness of the judgment and order dated 24.01.2023
whereby the dispute between the respondent - bank and the
APMC has been adjudicated, cannot be examined at the
instance of the present appellant who was respondent no.2 in
the writ proceedings.
4. The present appeal, is dismissed, being misconceived. It
is clarified that dismissal of the present appeal will not come
in the way of the appellant/ original respondent no.2 in any
independent proceedings, if initiated by him or any future
proceedings.
Consequently, the Civil Application for Stay would not
survive and the same is disposed of, accordingly.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )
(D.N.RAY,J)
A. B. VAGHELA
