Gujarat High Court
M/S. J.K. Paper Ltd vs Shri Natwarlal Mohanlal Shah Since Dead ... on 23 June, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7332/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025
undefined
Reserved On :-
Pronounced On : 23/06/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7332 of 2025
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2025
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7332 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J. L. ODEDRA
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
M/S. J.K. PAPER LTD.
Versus
SHRI NATWARLAL MOHANLAL SHAH SINCE DEAD , THROUGH LHS-
LRS & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. PERCY KAVINA, Senior Advocate assisted by MS KAJAL R
SHINGADIYA(8551) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR SHAUNAK VYAS, ASST.GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Respondent(s) No. 2
Mr. DEVANG VYAS, Senior Advocate assisted by VIDIT S
SHARMA(7365) for the Respondent(s) No. 1.1,1.2,1.3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J. L. ODEDRA
CAV JUDGMENT
1. In the present Special Civil Application, the challenge is to
the order dated 23.05.2025, passed below Exhibit No. 1 in
LAR Execution Number 3 of 2023 (hereinafter, the
impugned order). Vide the Sp. Civil Application, the
petitioner has prayed, for the following reliefs:
A. Your Lordships may be pleased to admit and allow
this petition; and
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7332/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025
undefined
B. Your Lordships may be pleased to issue writ of
certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or directions
and be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned order
below Exhibit 1 dated 23.5.2025 passed by the learned
Principal Senior Civil judge at Vyara, passed in LAR
Execution Number 3/2023 and
C. Your Lordships may be pleased to stay and
suspend the operation and effect of the impugned order
below Exhibit 1 dated 23.52025 passed by the learned
Principal Senior Civil Judge at Vyra passed in LAR
Execution number 3/2023 during the pendency and final
disposal of this petition; and
D. Your Lordships may be pleased to grant ad interim
relief in terms of Sub Para (C) pending hearing and final
disposal of this petition; AND
E. Your Lordships may be pleased to pass such other
and further order as may be deemed just in proper in the
facts and circumstances of the present case.
2. Under the Civil Application preferred in the aforesaid
Special Civil Application, the applicant has prayed, reliefs,
including ad interim reliefs of that very nature, inter alia,
for:
the stay of further proceedings of the LAR
Execution Number 3/2023, pending before the learned
Principal Senior Civil Judge at Vyara, District Tapi, during
the pendency and final disposal of this petition, AND
passing of an order for withholding of an amount of
Rs. 4.72 Crores and not to release it in favour of the
Respondents - Claimants (Decree Holders) and further to
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7332/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025
undefined
invest the same with any nationalized bank vide FDRs till
the final adjudication of the present Special Civil
Application.
3. The bare facts, to the extent necessary for adjudication of
the present proceedings, are as follows:
A. That proceedings were initiated for acquisition
of certain lands to be allotted to M/s. J. K. Paper Ltd.,
(hereinafter, the Appellants). Under the corresponding
award dated 27.12.2006, passed under section 11 of
the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Rupees 124 per
square meter was awarded for the acquired non
agricultural lands.
B. That a Land Reference Application No, 78 of
2012 (Old No. 61 / 2007) (hereinafter, the Land
Reference) was preferred against the aforesaid award
by the aggrieved land owners, which culminated into a
judgment and award dated 23.02.2023 (hereinafter,
the Land Reference Order).
C. Aggrieved by the Land Reference Order, an
appeal, being the First Appeal Number 2489 of 2023
(hereinafter, the First Appeal) came to be preferred,
which is pending before the High Court of Gujarat. In
those proceedings, there is no stay granted against the
execution of the Land Reference Order.
D. The judgment and award in the Land Reference
was sought to be executed by the original land owners
by way of an LAR Execution No. 3 of 2023
(hereinafter, the Execution Proceedings) sometime in
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7332/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025
undefined
the month of June 2023.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that it's Sr. Advocate, Mr.
Percy Kavina, had to undergo a medical procedure owing to
a medical emergency and that therefore, when the first
appeal was listed on 16.4,2025, an adjournment was
sought therein by the Appellants. The same came to be
adjourned to 25.06.2025.
5. Pursuant to the said adjournment, the Appellants
approached the Execution Court on 17.04.2025, and
prayed for time, urging the Execution Court to adjourn the
matter, by way of application Exhibit 59 filed in the said
proceedings. Incidentally, in the said application Exhibit
59, the next date for adjournment was specifically
mentioned / prayed for as 25.06.2025. It may be recalled
that the said date was the next date of listing of the First
Appeal.
6. On the aforesaid application exhibit 59, the learned
advocate for the other side endorsed the following:
સદર કા મે દરખા સ્ત હો ય , જવા બ રજ કારવા ની જ ગવા ઈ નીથી , સ મે વા ળા દ્વા ર
મેડિ કાલ ગ્રા ઉન્ પર મે"દત મે #ગલ હો ય, અગ ઉની જમે છેલ્લ મે"દત આપવા મે # આવા ત
વા ધો
# નીથી
7. The closest English translation to the aforesaid reads as
follows:
The matter being an execution proceeding, there is no
provision for filing reply, (but as, sic) the other side has
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7332/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025
undefined
asked for adjournment on the ground of Illness, there is no
objection if a last adjournment is granted, as has been
granted in the past.
8. The aforesaid clearly indicates that the other side had
consented to the next adjourned date being 25.06.2025, as
there was no objection from the other side to the matter
being adjourned to the said date, viz, 25.06.2025.
9. The Executing Court was pleased to pass the following
order on the said application Exhibit 59:
Read. Heard. Perused endorsement. On perusal of record it
is seen that time and again adjournment is sought by
acquiring body as appeal filed by them is pending. During
hearing it is pointed out by Ld. Counsel for the petitioner
that his client has also filed appeal for enhancement of
amount. Be it as it may be!
As per direction issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India
in Para 75 of Judgement dated: 06.03.2025 passed in Civil
Appeal No.: 3640-42 of 2025, this court is under judicial
obligation to dispose of all execution petitions within 06
month.
This court is also bound by Circular No.: D.2913/2025
dated: 01.04.2025 issued by Hon'ble High Court to report
compliance thereof on completion of 06 months.
In view of above facts as emerging on record and
considering medical reason as well as no objection by other
side, by way of last and final chance time granted till
09.05.2025. It is made clear that appropriate order in
accordance with law will be passed on 09.05.2025 and no
more time will be granted.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7332/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025
undefined
10. Apparently, on the next date, 09.05.2025, the Appellants
filed their objections before the Executing Court, by way of
document Exhibit 61 and Exhibit 67. At paragraph 10 of
the impugned order, the Executing Court refers to the
objections of the Appellant indicating both of the aforesaid
documents, viz, document Exhibit 61 and document
Exhibit 67. Thereafter the Executing Court passed the
impugned order dated 23.05.2025, below Exhibit No. 1 in
LAR Execution Number 3 of 2023.
11. Ld. Senior Advocate Shri Percy Kavina for the petitioner,
has submitted that the impugned order ignores the
happenings of the events before the Executing Court,
namely that of 17.04.2025. It was submitted that no-
objection to adjournment application under Exhibit 59,
dated 17.4.2025, by the other side, in view of Sr. Adv. Shri
Percy Kavina's ill health, was for the matter being
adjourned to 26.6.2025. Thus, the same should have been
granted by the Executing Court. It was also contended that
possession of a large part of the acquired land, i.e., out of
the land admeasuring 140504 sq. meters (i.e. 34.72 acres),
only land admeasuring 40274 sq. meters (i.e. 9.95 acres),
has been handed over to the Petitioner, on which area the
factory premises is built. It was submitted that the issue of
possession has also been raised in the First Appeal, by way
of detailed affidavits. It was submitted that in the
objections Exhibit 61, the aforesaid contention had been
taken. It was submitted that the order of the Land
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7332/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025
undefined
Reference Court was subject to First Appeal before the
Division Bench of this Court. It was submitted that both
the valuation of the land, i.e., the first value arrived at by
the Collector, as also that as enhanced by the Land
Reference Court, and the issue of not giving of possession,
were subjudice before the Hon'ble High Court hearing the
First Appeal. It was submitted that the issue of possession
can also be agitated before the Executing Court under
section 47 of the CPC. Hence, there was no reason for the
Executing Court to expedite execution proceedings, unless
the order had reached finality. It was also submitted that
there is another appeal filed by the Land Loosers (for
enhancement of the compensation) which, according to the
Ld. Sr. Advocate was also to be tagged to the First Appeal
of the Appellant and was required to be heard and
disposed of together with the First Appeal of the Appellant.
12. It was further submitted that the Appellant had also
mentioned the matter before the Division Bench as regards
the order passed on Application Exhibit 57 and the need
for adjudication of Civil Application thereto, however, the
Division Bench could not take up the matter.
13. It was submitted that despite all of the aforesaid, the
objections before the Executing Court were treated merely
as delaying tactics, especially to delay payment to the land
losers. Thereafter, citing the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in judgment dated 06.03.2025 passed in
Civil Appeal No.: 3640-42 of 2025 as also the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7332/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025
undefined
Administrative Decision of the Hon'ble High Court of
Gujarat vide Circular No.: D.2913/2025 dated:
01.04.2025, the Executing Court has issued warrants for
attachment of movable properties of acquiring body
respondent No. 2 (the Petitioners), further directing
compliance in any case before 31.05.2025.
14. It was urged before the Court that in the overall facts and
circumstances, the Vacation bench may, keeping in view
the judicial propriety, more particularly, as the Division
Bench is seized of the matter, allow this Writ Petition.
15. On the other hand Ld. Sr. Advocate Mr. Devang Vyas
submitted before the Court that the irony is that the land
is acquired in 2007 on which the Appellants have
constructed a plant. Thus, the land loosers are deprived of
lands for a period of 20 years and not a single farthing has
come their way. That initially, the Appellants, when the
matter was before the Collector, determined on their own
that the valuation was of Rs. 124 per square meter, which
in the valuation committee's report had been to the tune of
Rs 950 per square meter. It was submitted that the
Valuation Committee's Report was suppressed by the
Appellants. It was submitted that ultimately, this was
upheld in the Judgment and Award of the Land Reference
Court. It was submitted that even when the matter was at
large before the Hon'ble Division Bench, the Division Bench
was of the view that since what is being prayed is a stay of
a money decree, urged the appellant to deposit 70
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7332/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025
undefined
percent / 50 percent etc. beforr the Hon'ble Division Bench
for the Hon'ble Division Bench to consider staying the
Executing Court's Order. But to that the Appellant was not
agreeable and that therefore, on 06.05.2025, the Hon'ble
Division Bench did not deem it appropriate to either stay
the execution or the original judgement and award. It was
submitted that this fact was not even denied before the
Executing Court by the Petitioners. It was submitted
further that before the Executing Court, the matter was
being adjourned, as such, since 13.7.2023, which has been
with the consent of both the sides, which went on till
17.4.2025. It was submitted that the endorsement on the
Application Exhibit 59 on the said day ought not to be
construed to mean that that matter may be kept on
25.06.2025. It just meant that the matter be adjourned.
The Executing Court, by a last chance, granted time till 9th
of May 25, making it clear that appropriate order, in
accordance with law will be passed on 9th May, 2025 and
that no more time will be granted on 9th May 2025. It was
submitted that it was then that the acquiring body filed its
objections, i.e., after a period of two years from the date of
preferring Execution Petition by the Land Loosers. It was
submitted that the issue of possession could not have been
gone by the Executing Court as it could not go beyond
decree. It was submitted that the Executing Court has also
observed that it was between the Respondent No. 1 and 2
as regards the taking of possession, more so when the
section 12 and 16 of the Act specifically indicate that the
land vests in the Respondent No. 1 posts its acquisition. It
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7332/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025
undefined
was submitted that in any case, there was no objections
from the land losers as regards that taking of possession of
land by the Appellant herein.
16. Attention of this Court was also drawn to the fact that
even if it was assumed without admitting that the
Appellant has been given possession of land only to the
extent of 40274 Sq. Meters then too the corresponding
compensation would come to Rs. 3,32,66,324/- (Rs. Three
Crores, Thirty two lacs, Sixty six Thousand, Three Hundred
and Twenty four only). It was submitted by the learned
senior Advocate that the same would now become to the
tune of Rs. 18 Crores and 69 lakh and odd, after adding
the addition compensation, 30% solatium , 12% rise, 9%
interest per annum on the aggregate of the foregoing till
20.04.2006 and from thereon interest at the rate of 15%
per annum till 28.05.2025. And this amount too has not
been deposited as a precondition to stay of the Execution
Proceedings. It was therefore urged that the present Special
Civil Application may be dismissed as no illegality could be
attributed to the order of the Executing Court.
17. In his rejoinder arguments, Ld. Sr. Advocate Mr. Percy
Kavina submitted that original amount as per the earlier
assessment at the rate of Rs. 124 per square meter has
been deposited and withdrawn by the land loosers. It was
submitted that the Land Acquisition Committee's so-called
report is exhibited in a most improper manner, which is
the subject matter of the argument before the Hon'ble
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7332/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025
undefined
Division Bench in the First Appeal of the Appellant.
Moreover, he also submitted his earlier contention
regarding the no-objection by the other side and yet the
Executing Court proceeding further with the Execution
Proceedings. It was however submitted that the Appellant
was prepared to deposit an amount of Rs. 4,72,38,000/-
(Rupees Four Crores, Seventy Two Lakhs, Thirty Eight
Thousand only) purely as a stop gap arrangement and only
to show good faith. It was thus urged that the Petition may
be allowed.
18. Thereafter, the matter was posted for orders. However,
before the Orders could be passed, the matter was again
listed with Civil Application for Stay No. 1 of 2025 in this
writ petition. The prayers of the said Civil Application has
already been quoted in former part of this Order.
19. It appears that after the conclusion of the hearing before
this Courrt, the executing Court had carried out further
execution proceedings and the bailiff had reached the
premises of the appellant and had attached certain
movable properties lying in the factory premises. It has
been pleaded that under the compelling circumstances, the
appellant-company made over a cheque of Rs. 2 Crores to
the bailiff. On the next date of hearing i.e. on 31.03.2025,
when the executing Court took up the execution
proceedings, the bailiff submitted his report along with the
પ#ચક્ય સ. It has been additionally pleaded that the appellant,
in terms of the undertaken before this Court has proceeded
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7332/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025
undefined
to deposit an additional amount of Rs. 2 Crores 72 Lakhs
by way of a cheque before the Executing Court and the
matter was thereafter adjourned to 09.06.2025 by the
Executing Court. Thus, it has been stated in the Civil
Application that the following sums have been deposited;
(a) Initial deposit of Rs. 2,61,33,744/-
(b) deposit of Rs. 2 Crores during the attachment
undertaken by bailiff (under the order of the Executing
Court).
(c) Deposit of Rs. 2 Crore and 72 Lakhs by way of a
cheque dated 31.05.2025, before the Executing Court.
20. Thus, an aggregate amount of Rs. 7,33,33,744/- has been
deposited by the appellants/ writ-petitioners. It was
submitted that now there is a prayer by the respondents-
claimants seeking withdrawal of the said amount to the
tune of Rs. 4,72,00,000/- in as much as the earlier
amount to the tune of Rs. 2,61,33,744/- has already been
withdrawn by the respondents-claimants.
21. In view of the aforesaid proceedings, it was canvassed that
in case such an amount is withdrawn, when only out of
304.72 acres land of 9.95 acres had been handed over to
the appellants and a large chunk of land admeasuring
24.77 acres still in possession of the respondents-
claimants, such an indulgence of the allowing withdrawal
of the said amount would amount to the grave injustice
and, therefore, the execution was requested to be stayed
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7332/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025
undefined
and the reliefs under the Civil Application.
22. Of course, the respondents reiterated there the same
submissions as canvassed under the original writ-
petitioners.
23. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective
parties, this Court believes that it cannot be insisted by the
parties that the Executing Court grants adjournment to a
date specified by them. Therefore, it cannot lie on the
mouth of the appellant that because the other side had
consented to the matter being adjourned to 25.06.2025 in
their application Exhibit-59 dated 17.04.2025, therefore,
the date agreed by the parties ought to have been granted
by the Executing Court. When it is a dictum of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court for early disposal of Execution Petition
under the Civil Application No. 3640-42 of 2025, no court
could have been compelled to grant an adjournment even
when there was an agreement between the parties for a
date viz. 25.06.2025. For that very reason, the fact that the
execution proceedings were pending since 2023 is no
ground for the Executing Court to put to hold further
proceedings. It may be noted that the said direction of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court was also reinforced by way of a
circular referred to in the order of the executing Court
below Exhibit-59. Hence, the said submissions are liable to
be rejected.
24. Indeed, the order of the land reference Court had been
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7332/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025
undefined
subject matter of a challenge before the Hon'ble Division
Bench of this Court. The issues as to the decision and
adjudication of possession of land as also those pertaining
to the compensation (price of the land), are at large before
the Division Bench and, therefore, it would not be
appropriate to this Court to comment on the merits of the
said matter. However, at this stage, this Court has noted
that a sum of Rs. 4,72,00,000/- has been deposited by the
appellant. Of which, a sum of Rs. 2,61,33,744/- has
already been withdrawn by the original land owners- the
respondents hereto. As demonstrated before this Court by
way of a calculation, even if it was assumed that about
40274 Sq. Meters is a total area which has been given
possession to the appellants herein, then too, at the
enhanced rate allowed by the learned reference court, the
amount would come to the tune of Rs. 18,69,33,773/-. The
said calculation sheet was submitted by the land loosers
(through their senior advocate Mr. Devang Vyas) during the
course of hearing the matter on 28.05.2025. If we calculate
the percentage of the amount that has been deposited,
taking hypothetically only the land of which the possession
has been granted to the petitioner, a sum of Rs.
4,72,00,000/- comes to about 25.28% of Rs.
18,67,00,000/- and if entire sum of Rs. 7,33,33,744/- is
considered, it would come to 39.27% of Rs.
18,67,00,000/-. When computing this amount, the land,
for which possession has not been granted to the
appellant, is not even taken into account. In the
circumstances, balancing equities, it would be
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7332/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025
undefined
preposterous for this Court to grant stay for withdrawal of
the amount of Rs. 4,72,00,000/- so as to deny the land
owners a legitimate dues. Of course, the compensation
amount would be the subject to final adjudication by the
Division Bench. Thus, so as to avoid prejudice to the
present petitioners, it is directed that if the executing court
were to disburse the said amount, it would take
appropriate security so that if the said amount were to be
recovered in future, the said recovery is not rendered futile
for the lack of adequate security.
25. Insofar as the reliefs under the main petition are
concerned, the petition is liable to be allowed to a limited
extent. As such, the stay or otherwise of the execution
proceedings ought to depend on the final outcome of the
First Appeal. Therefore, this Court is inclined to stay the
execution proceedings only till the next date of hearing on
which the matter is now to be listed before the Division
Bench i.e. on 25.06.2025 subject to the caveat that the
respondents-claimants shall be free to withdraw an
amount of Rs. 4,72,00,000/- deposited with the executing
Court subject to that rendering adequate security.
26. With the aforesaid directions, both the Special Civil
Application No. 7332 of 2025 and Civil Application No. 1 of
2025 stands disposed of in terms herein above.
(J. L. ODEDRA, J)
JIGAR J RABARI
