Gujarat High Court
Taluka Development Officer vs Lh Of Decd. Pratapbhai Bhailalbhai on 26 June, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/3289/2021 ORDER DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3289 of 2021
==========================================================
TALUKA DEVELOPMENT OFFICER & ANR.
Versus
LH OF DECD. PRATAPBHAI BHAILALBHAI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
DECEASED LITIGANT THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS/ REPRESENTATIVES for
the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR MOHSIN M HAKIM(5396) for the Respondent(s) No. 1.1,1.2,2
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 3,4,5,6,7
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT
Date : 26/06/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Advocate Mr. Mohsin M.
Hakim waives service of notice of rule for the respective
respondents. With the consent of parties, the matter is taken
up for final hearing.
2. Heard learned Advocate Mr. H. S. Munshaw for the
petitioners and learned Advocate Mr. Mohsin M. Hakim for
the contesting respondents. The presence of the other
respondents is not necessary for adjudication of the present
writ application.
3. The present writ application is filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs:
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/3289/2021 ORDER DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
"(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari
or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ, order or
direction quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated
25.08.2020 passed by Ld. Additional District Judge, Chottaudaipur
below Exh.22 in Civil Miscellaneous Application No.07 of 2020 and
may further be pleased to allow the said application preferred by the
petitioners herein;
(B) During the pendency and final disposal of the present petition,
YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to stay the impugned order dated
25.08.2020 passed by Ld. Additional District Judge, Chottaudaipur
below Exh.22 in Civil Miscellaneous Application No.07 of 2020;
(C) During the pendency and final disposal of the present petition,
YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to stay the proceedings of Special
Execution Petition No.04 of 2017 pending before the Ld. Civil Judge
(Senior Division), Bodeli;
(D) Pass any such other and/or further orders that may be thought just
and proper, in the facts and circumstances of the present case."
4. The parties will be referred to as per their original position
before the Trial Court.
5. Submissions of the Petitioners - Plaintiffs:
5.1. At the outset, learned Advocate Mr. Munshaw submits that
during the pendency of the matter, the petitioners herein
have already deposited the entire decreetal amount with the
Executing Court pursuant to the execution filed by the
original plaintiffs-decree holders.
5.2. Learned Advocate Mr. Munshaw would submit that if there is
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/3289/2021 ORDER DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
any shortfall in the deposit, he will give appropriate
instructions to the petitioners to recalculate the amount and
if any shortfall is found in the deposit, the petitioners will
deposit it within reasonable time.
5.3. Learned Advocate Mr. Munshaw would submit as petitioners
herein came into existence as bifurcated from the District of
Vadodara and having no knowledge about the judgment and
decree in the appeal before the Appellate Court, they came to
know about the suit proceedings only on receiving a notice in
execution. In light of the said facts, it took a long time to get
appropriate instructions as well as some time consume to
gather the relevant documents from the predecessor of the
petitioners before filing an appeal, whereby, there was a
delay of around 2 years and 271 days in filing the regular
appeal before the District Court.
5.4. Learned Advocate Mr. Munshaw would further submit that
once the petitioners have already deposited the decreetal
amount with the Trial Court, the interest of the judgment-
creditor would be secured and as such, there was no malafide
intention and/or any dilatory tactic on the part of the
petitioners in filing the appeal belatedly.
5.5. So, learned Advocate Mr. Munshaw requests this Court to
allow the delay application, thereby condoned the delay in
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/3289/2021 ORDER DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
filing the appeal.
5.6. Making the above submissions, learned Advocate Mr.
Munshaw would request this Court to allow the present
application.
6. Submissions of the Respondents - Defendants:
6.1. Per contra, learned Advocate Mr. Hakim would submit that as
such, there is a long and inordinate delay on the part of the
petitioners, who consumed more than 2 years and 271 days in
filing the appeal, whereby the judgment-creditors/plaintiffs,
are deprived of realizing the fruits of the money decree.
6.2. Learned Advocate Mr. Hakim would further submit that the
plaintiffs have lost their minor son due to the negligence of
the defendants and compensation of only Rs.5,00,000/- has
been awarded by the Trial Court, which is otherwise just and
reasonable in light of the recent past pronouncement of the
Honourable Supreme Court of India.
6.3. Learned Advocate Mr. Hakim would submit that even if this
Court accepts the submissions made by the learned Advocate
Mr. Munshaw, then an appropriate condition may be imposed
upon the petitioners to deposit balance decreetal amount as
according to his instruction, there is a shortfall in deposit of
decreetal amount and also allow the judgment-creditors/
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/3289/2021 ORDER DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
plaintiffs to withdraw the amount so deposited by the
petitioners herein, lying with the Executing Court.
6.4. Making the above submissions, learned Advocate Mr. Hakim
for the respondents prayed for the dismissal of the present
application.
7. No other submissions are being made by any of learned
advocates for the parties.
8. I have heard the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties at length.
ANALYSIS
9. After appreciating the aforesaid submissions and after going
through the impugned application and the order passed
thereon by the Appellate Court, I am of the opinion that a
sufficient cause is made out by the petitioners herein for
filing the appeal with delay of 2 years and 271 days, in as
much as it remained undisputed fact that the petitioners
came into existence on the bifurcation of the District -
Vadodara and joined in the execution for the first time for
realization of the decreetal amount. As government
machinery always go slow and due to procedural aspects, it
consumed almost more than 2 years to file the appeal; albeit,
there was no malafide intention on the part of any officer of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/3289/2021 ORDER DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
the petitioners to file the appeal with such delay, as such its
not the defence of the other side.
10. Furthermore, there is no dilatory tactics on the part of the
petitioners to file appeal with delay, as can be observed from
the record. Moreover, it is reported to this Court that the
decreetal amount, though not fully, but substantially
deposited by the petitioners, which shows their bona fides in
the matter. The petitioner is an arm of government always
depends upon instruction/permission/sanction either to
approach higher court or to comply with order of the court
wherein it took time in instituting legal proceeding in
appellate court in the case on hand more particularly in light
of said fact that petitioners came into existence post decree
of trial court, certain leave way requires to be considered by
taking liberal approach while perusing delay application filed
by petitioners. When such delay is not found malafide/dilatory
tactics used by petitioners and not sheer abuse of process of
law, this Court exercising its power under Article 227 of
Constitution of India would like to accept explanation
forthcoming from petitioners as a sufficient cause in filing the
appeal.
11. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the
present case, I am inclined to accept the prayer made by the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/3289/2021 ORDER DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
petitioners and thereby condone the delay of 2 years and 271
days in filing the appeal before the District Court.
12. At the same time, this Court cannot lost sight of the fact that
the judgment-creditor should not be further deprived from
getting fruits of the decree merely appeal would remain
pending and as such, a minor boy lost his life and
compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- has been awarded by the Trial
Court, in that view of the matter, at this stage, the Judgment-
Creditors/plaintiffs are entitled to receive interest on such
amount deposited by the petitioners lying with the Executing
Court and on that condition, delay can be condoned to which
learned advocate Mr. Munshaw would not in a position to
raise any dispute.
Conclusion.
13. Thus, in view of the aforesaid, I pass the following order:
(a) The Judgment and order dated 25th August, 2020 passed by
the Additional District Court, Chhotaudepur, below Exhibit 22
in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 7 of 2019, is hereby
quashed and set aside. Consequently, Civil Miscellaneous
Application No. 7 of 2019 is hereby allowed, thereby delay of
2 years and 271 days in filing the regular appeal by the
petitioners, is hereby condoned.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/3289/2021 ORDER DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
(b) The Appellate Court shall register the regular civil appeal on
its file and hear and decide such appeal as expeditiously as
possible, preferably on or before 31st December, 2026, as it
touches upon the matter of compensation.
(c) The parties to the appeal shall extend their cooperation and
support to the concerned District Court to decide such appeal
in accordance with law, without being influenced by any of
the observations made by the Appellate Court while passing
the impugned order or by any observation made by this Court
in the present writ application.
(d) The Executing Court is hereby directed to invest the amount
deposited by the petitioners in a fixed deposit, initially for a
period of one year, which may be renewed from time to time
until final outcome of the appeal filed by the petitioners
before the concerned Appellate Court.
(e) If the Executing Court, after hearing the parties found that
there is any shortfall in deposit of the amount by the
petitioners, the petitioners are hereby directed to deposit
such shortfall of amount within the time granted by the
Executing Court.
(f) The original plaintiffs/judgment-creditors are entitled to
receive periodical interest accrued on such fixed deposit
receipt on quarterly basis. Such arrangement is made to give
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/3289/2021 ORDER DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
succor to the original plaintiffs thereby they can sustain
themselves during the pendency of the appeal. This would
also one of condition on which this Court would like to
condone delay in filing appeal.
(g) All these arrangements will be subject to the final outcome of
the regular civil appeal filed by the petitioners, which is to be
decided on its merits.
(h) If any amount which has already been withdrawn by the
original plaintiffs/judgment-creditors during the pendency of
the present writ application out of amount so deposited by
the petitioners herein, or otherwise withdrawal of interest on
said FDR, the same shall not be recovered from them in any
circumstances including appeal stand allow.
(i) If ultimately, petitioners lost in their appeal and appellate
court will finally dismiss their appeal, amount in FDR be
released in favour of original plaintiffs on proper verification
by passing appropriate order by court concern.
13. Thus, in view of the aforesaid, the present writ application
requires to be allowed, which is hereby allowed. Rule is made
absolute to the aforesaid extent.
(MAULIK J.SHELAT,J)
Nilesh
