Gujarat High Court
Decd Sikandarkhan Kamaluddinkhan ... vs Kumar Mayurdhwajshinhji Vijaysinhji ... on 3 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/13599/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13599 of 2025
==========================================================
DECD SIKANDARKHAN KAMALUDDINKHAN SINCE DECD. THROUGH
HIS LHS & ORS.
Versus
KUMAR MAYURDHWAJSHINHJI VIJAYSINHJI RANA & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR DIGANT B KAKKAD(6523) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT
Date : 03/10/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Digan B. Kakkad for the
petitioners.
2. After arguing for some time, under the instructions of his
client, learned Advocate Mr. Digan B. Kakkad does not invite
the reasons in the matter. Nonetheless, learned Advocate Mr.
Kakkad would state that pursuant to the order passed below
Exhibit 63 in the Special Execution Application No. 13 of 2017,
by the Executing Court, abruptly possession of the suit
property was taken over by the decree holder through the help
of the bailiff on 5th June 2025. Thereafter, the decree holder
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/13599/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2025
undefined
has filed withdrawal pursis below Exhibit 64, which came to be
accepted by the Executing Court vide its order dated 21st June
2025, thereby disposed of aforesaid execution as withdrawn.
3. So, in light of the aforesaid facts, Mr. Kakkad would submit
that the right of the petitioners, who were dispossessed from
the suit property, requires to be adjudicated by the Executing
Court as per Order 21, Rule 99 read with 101 of Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908, which is taken away and to that extent, this
Court may permit the petitioners to submit an appropriate
application before the Executing Court.
4. Considering the aforesaid submissions and request, it appears
reasonable, requires acceptance.
5. It is open for the petitioners herein to file an appropriate
application under Order 21, Rule 99 read with 101 of CPC in
Special Execution Application No. 13 of 2017, though
withdrawn by the decree holder, wherein, the petitioners are
permitted to seek appropriate relief in accordance with law.
6. Such permission is granted to the petitioners, considering the
peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, inasmuch as after
taking over of possession of the suit property by the decree
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/13599/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2025
undefined
holder, the withdrawal pursis was filed by the decree holder
below Exhibit 64 in the aforesaid execution on 10th June 2025,
without serving any copy to the judgment debtor, including the
petitioners herein, who happen to be legal heirs of the third
party objector namely Sikandarkhan Kamaluddinkhan.
7. As and when such application will be filed by the petitioners
herein, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the decree
holder, such applications shall be decided by the Executing
Court in accordance with law.
8. It is made clear that this Court has neither gone into nor
examined the merits of the matter. So, all the rights and
contentions of the respective parties are hereby kept open to be
adjudicated by the Executing Court in the said application.
9. In view of the aforesaid observations and reserving liberty in
favor of the petitioners as aforesaid, the present writ
application is disposed of as withdrawn. No order as to costs.
(MAULIK J.SHELAT,J)
NRP
