[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Legal Heirs Of Deceased Nanalal ... vs Rajkot Nagarik Sahakari Bank Ltd on 24 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/15210/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/02/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15210 of 2025
==========================================================
LEGAL HEIRS OF DECEASED NANALAL FICHADIYA & ORS.
Versus
RAJKOT NAGARIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD. & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR .B A PATEL(5281) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,1.1,1.2,1.3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 24/02/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. The present petition is filed under Article 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, 1950 by the petitioners seeking following
prayers:
"(A) To admit and allow this petition.
(B) To quash and set aside the order dated
18.09.2025 passed by the 7 th Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot, in Execution Petition
No. 227/2021 below Exhibit - 27 and direct the
warrant issued to be cancelled as annexed at
Annexure - A to this petition.
(C) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal
of this petition, be pleased to stay the
implementation and execution of the order dated
18.09.2025 passed by 7th Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Rajkot in Execution Petition No.
227/2021 below Exhibit - 27 as annexed at
Annexure - A to this petition.
(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."
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/15210/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/02/2026
undefined
2. Rule. Heard learned advocate Mr. B.A. Patel for the
petitioners.
3. Learned advocate for the petitioners contended that the
respondents herein initiated Arbitration Proceedings before the
learned Arbitrator, Rajkot Nagarik Sahakari Bank Ltd., Rajkot,
being Arbitration Dispute Suit No. 28 of 2005. The learned
Arbitrator, vide award dated 18.03.2016, passed an ex-parte
award directing the respondent herein to pay an amount of
Rs.15,974/-, along with interest at the rate of 19% per annum and
penal interest at the rate of 2% per annum from 01.02.2005 till
realisation, along with other expenses. The respondent - Bank
thereafter filed an Execution Petition seeking execution of the said
award. In the Execution Proceedings, objections were raised by
the present petitioners. It is contended by learned advocate for the
petitioners that the award is fraudulent and that the father of the
petitioners had neither availed any loan nor stood as a guarantor in
the alleged loan transaction. It was contended that the father of the
petitioners was wrongly added as an opponent in the Arbitration
Dispute Suit. The petitioners have also preferred an appeal under
Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The same
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/15210/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/02/2026
undefined
is pending for its adjudication. In the meantime, the respondent -
Bank moved an application seeking issuance of warrant of arrest
against the judgment debtor - petitioner herein. Though a digital
reply was filed by the present petitioners, the learned Court below
allowed the said application on 18.09.2025. Being aggrieved and
dissatisfied with the order passed by the 7 th Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot in Execution Petition No. 228 of 2021,
the present petitioners are before this Court.
4. Having considered the submissions canvassed by learned
advocate for the petitioners and upon perusal of the papers placed
on record, it appears that the respondent - Bank initiated
proceedings under the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002
read with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The sole
Arbitrator vide award dated 18.03.2016, directed the petitioners to
pay an amount of Rs.15,974/-, along with interest at the rate of
19% per annum and penal interest at the rate of 2% per annum
from 01.02.2005 till realisation, along with other expenses. It
appears that the impugned award has been assailed by the
present petitioners under Section 34 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 and the same is pending adjudication.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/15210/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/02/2026
undefined
However, in the Execution Petition, respondent - Bank moved an
application seeking issuance of warrant of arrest against the
present petitioners. The learned Court below, after considering the
provisions contained under Order XXI Rule 30 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908, granted the application. The petitioners herein
have already availed an alternate efficacious remedy by way of an
appeal challenging the impugned award.
5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in my
view, the order impugned is not against the settled proposition of
law and nothing contrary could be pointed out during the course of
submissions whereby this Court can exercise its supervisory
powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. As the order
impugned is not perversed and the same, being a legal order, this
Court is not inclined to interfere and therefore the present petition
is dismissed. No order as to costs. Rule is discharged.
(D. M. DESAI,J)
MUSKAN
