Gujarat High Court
Suo Motu vs Rakesh Motilal Israni, Managing ... on 9 October, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/MCA/2194/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONTEMPT) NO.2194 of
2025
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION/20527/2022
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE L. S. PIRZADA
=============================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
=============================================
SUO MOTU
Versus
RAKESH MOTILAL ISRANI, MANAGING DIRECTOR,
PACIFICA DEVELOPERS PVT. LIMITED & ORS.
=============================================
Appearance:
LAW OFFICER BRANCH(420) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. KM ANTANI(6547) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. MIHIR JOSHI, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH J N
DEKAVADIYA(7792) for the Opponent(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE L. S. PIRZADA
Date : 09/10/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. The affidavits tendered by respondent nos.1, 2 and 3 are
already taken.
2. The present application has been registered as suo moto
contempt pursuant to the directions issued by the
learned Single Judge vide order dated 25.07.2025
passed in Misc. Civil Application (for withdrawal) No.2
of 2024 in Special Civil Application No.20527 of 2022
with Misc. Civil Application (Direction) No.3 of 2024 in
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/MCA/2194/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
Special Civil Application No.20527 of 2022.
3. Learned Single Judge has held the conduct of the
respondents as contemptuous in light of the orders
passed in the captioned Special Civil Application
No.20527 of 2022 and has directed to register suo moto
contempt proceedings.
4. Learned advocate Mr.K.M.Antani appearing for the
applicant has pointed out the orders passed in the writ
petition. The first order he has pointed out is the order
dated 07.10.2022 passed in the said writ petition,
wherein a statement was made on behalf of learned
Senior Advocate Mr.Unwala to deposit an amount of
Rs.24,00,000/- and it was further recorded that on such
deposit, ad-interim relief in terms of Paragraph No.12(C)
was granted. He has further submitted that thereafter,
the said writ petition was allowed to be withdrawn on
15.02.2024 by the learned Single Judge on the ground
that the petitioners have already availed the remedy by
filing a statutory appeal before the RERA Tribunal. It is
contended that subsequently, the captioned Misc. Civil
Applications are filed and when the learned Single Judge
noticed the fact that in fact, no appeal was filed and no
permission was sought by the respondents with regard
to either withdrawing the amount of Rs.25,00,000/- or
transferring it to the RERA Tribunal, the respondents
have committed contempt. It is submitted that the
interim order was passed on the condition of deposit of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/MCA/2194/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
Rs.24,00,000/- before the Registry of this Court initially
and after obtaining such interim order ultimately, the
writ petition was withdrawn by recording the statement
of the learned Senior Advocate Mr.Unwala that the
respondents have already availed a remedy by filing an
appeal before the Tribunal. However, it is submitted by
him that the appeal, which was filed was still at filing
stage and as it cannot be said that the remedy of filing
the appeal was already availed. Thus, it is submitted that
as observed by the learned Single Judge, the
respondents have committed a contemptuous conduct
and they may be appropriately punished.
5. At the outset, learned Senior Advocate Mr.Mihir Joshi
appearing for the respondents, while tendering the
affidavit-in-reply, has submitted that the respondents,
without any explanation, have tendered the
unconditional apology. It is submitted that, in fact no
case for committing contempt of court has been
established.
6. We have noticed that the affidavits filed by the
respondent no.1 - Mr.Rakesh Motilal Israni, Managing
Director of respondent no.5 - Shri Jay Chandani -
respondent no.2 and Mr.Kaushik Patel - respondent no.3
will reveal that all of them have tendered the
unconditional apology. The contents of one of the
affidavits filed by the respondent no.1 are incorporated
as under:
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/MCA/2194/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
"2. I have been made aware of the proceedings for
contempt initiated against me concerning the statements
made and orders passed in Special Civil Application
No.20527 of 2022 and connected applications.
3. At the very outset, with utmost humility and
sincerity, I do hereby tender my profound, unconditional,
and unqualified apology to this Hon'ble Court for any act,
omission, or conduct on my part which has led to the
initiation of these contempt proceedings.
4. I state and submit that I hold this Hon'ble Court
and the entire judicial system in the highest esteem and
regard. I had no intention, at any point in time, to willfully
disobey, mislead, disregard, or show any disrespect to the
authority and majesty of this Hon'ble Court.
5. I express my deepest and most sincere regret for
the statement made before this Hon'ble Court which has
been construed as contemptuous. The said lapse was
entirely unintentional and occurred due to a bona-fide
miscommunication and an inadvertent oversight. It was
never my intention to make a false statement or
deliberately mislead this Hon'ble Court.
6. I unreservedly withdraw any statement, action, or
inaction on my part that may have given an impression of
defiance, disrespect, or an attempt to abuse the process of
law.
7. I undertake to purge the contempt forthwith. I am
ready and willing to comply with any and all directions
that this Hon'ble Court has passed and may be pleased to
pass in the future to ensure that complete justice is done.
8. I place myself entirely at the mercy of this Hon'ble
Court. I humbly beseech this Hon'ble Court to graciously
accept my sincere and unconditional apology, to take a
lenient view of the matter, and to be pleased to discharge
the notice of contempt issued against me and drop the
present proceedings."
7. At this stage, we may refer to the stages of the writ
petitions and the orders passed therein. Initially, when
the writ petition being Special Civil Application
No.20527 of 2022 was filed, learned Single Judge
(Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nirzar S. Desai) vide order dated
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/MCA/2194/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
07.10.2022, in presence of the advocates appearing for
all the respective parties on an statement being made on
behalf of the councils of the present respondents -
original petitioners of depositing an amount of
Rs.24,00,000/-before this Court, the learned Single
Judge granted ad interim relief in terms of Paragraph
No.12(C) while issuing notice. It is not in dispute that
the aforesaid amount was deposited by the respondent-
original petitioner before the Registry of this Court.
Thereafter on 15.02.2024, the said writ petition was
withdrawn by the petitioner on a statement made by the
learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner to
the extent that "learned advocate appearing for the
petitioners, seek permission to withdraw the present
petition in light of the fact that the petitioners have
availed the remedy by filing a statutory appeal before
the RERA Tribuanl". The learned Single Judge allowed
the withdrawal of the writ petition on such statement
having been made by learned Senior Advocate. It is
pertinent to note that the said order was passed in
presence of the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties and it was not behind the back of any
of the parties to the proceedings.
8. Thereafter, it appears that two Misc. Civil Applications
were filed as mentioned here-in-above. One by the
respondent for seeking disbursement of the amount, the
other for seeking directions by the original respondents
while passing orders in the said Misc. Civil Applications
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/MCA/2194/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
on 25.07.2025. The learned Single Judge recorded the
aforementioned order and it was opined that the conduct
of the respondents-original petitioners appears to be
contemptuous since, though, an appeal was filed by the
Tribunal, it was at objection stage and it cannot be said
that actually, the appeal was filed. The learned Single
Judge, in this regard, has observed thus:
"13. The original petitioners have also mislead this
Court by making a false statement at bar that the
original petitioners have availed the statutory
remedy of filing an Appeal before the RERA
Tribunal, challenging the order dated 20.08.2019
and 12.06.2020 and having chosen not to challenge
the impugned order passed by the RERA in
execution proceedings dated 04.10.2022. However,
the aforesaid orders of the year 2019 and 2020 are
at the filing stage and the Appeal was filed on
04.10.2022, which is still at the stage of the office
objection and the office objections are not removed
till date. The interim relief granted vide orders dated
07.10.2022 and 15.02.2024 continued. The aforesaid
in the opinion of this Court, nothing but abuse of
process of law and the said act is contemptuous in
nature and in the opinion of this Court, the original
petitioners are jointly and severally liable for the
same. 'A party misguiding the Court to pass an order
which was never intended to be complied with,
would constitute an act of overawing the due
process of law and, thus, commit contempt of Court'
(Reference: M/s. Chithra Woods Manors Welfare
Association v/s. Shaji Augustine Alleged
Conetmnor / Respondent, reported in 2025 (0)
INSC 567)."
9. The learned Single Judge was of the opinion that the
respondent-original petitioner had misled the Court,
however, it is not denied and in fact, recorded in the
learned Single Judge's order itself that a specific
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/MCA/2194/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
contention was raised on behalf of the Senior Advocate
Mr.Unwala, appearing for the original petitioner-
present respondent that the appeal before the RERA
Tribunal was already filed. It is not in dispute that in fact
an appeal the provision of Section 43(5) of the RERA
Act, 2016, was already filed. The appeal was before the
Tribunal on 06.10.2022 with Inward No.369 of 2022.
10. The learned Single Judge was of the opinion that the
earlier statement of withdrawing the writ petition on the
pretext that "the petitioners have already availed the
remedy is a misguiding factor" since the appeal was at
objection stage. However, we are of the opinion that
since the appeal was already filed, and an inward
number was already given, and it was at office objection
stage, it cannot be said that the learned Senior Advocate
has made a deliberate and conscious statement for
misleading the Court. The objections were not removed
and the issue with regard to the pre-depositing the
amount as required under provisions of the RERA
Tribunal was the entire lookout of the Tribunal. We have
noticed that in fact, the learned Senior Advocate
appearing for the respondents-the original petitioner has
stood by his statement of depositing of Rs.24,00,000/-
before the Registry and the same was also deposited. A
request was also made by learned Senior Advocate
appearing for the respondent no.5 that said amount may
also be either disbursed or transferred to the RERA
Tribunal as a pre-deposit. Today, it is informed that the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/MCA/2194/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
said amount is already withdrawn by the original
respondents. Hence, we do not find that there is
deliberate, willful attempt made by the learned Senior
Advocate appearing for the respondents to mislead the
Court. Though, we do not find any contemptuous
conduct, we accept the affidavit filed on behalf of the
respondents.
11. The present suo moto contempt proceedings stand
closed. A photocopy of the affidavit of the respondent
no.5 is already taken on record, subject to the same
having the original being filed before the Registry
Tomorrow.
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
(L. S. PIRZADA, J)
Jaimin Prajapati/90
