NARENDRA NILKANTHBHAI LELE Vs. RAMESHBHAI GAJANAN JETKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner son of original Judgment Debtor has challenged an order dated 21.6.2019 passed below application Exh.20 in Execution Application No.38 of 2013 by Civil Court, Vadodara. By the said order, the learned Executing Court has allowed the application submitted by the respondents herein for bringing legal heirs of the original Judgment Debtor and ordered to join the petitioner as heirs of the original Judgment Debtor.

(2.) Mr. S.P. Majmudar, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner has raised two contentions before this Court :- (i) that the original Judgment Debtor who happens to be father of the petitioner herein had in his cross-examination in the suit proceedings declared that he had four children. However, the respondents herein have filed an application to bring legal heirs of original Judgment Debtor by showing the name of only the present petitioner. (ii) That there is 700 days delay in filing the application for bringing legal heirs of the original Judgment Debtor and thereby joining the petitioner as party in the execution proceedings by the respondents as the original Judgment Debtor had expired on 30.9.2014 and the original respondents submitted application Exh.20 on 23.2.2016 and, therefore, the learned Executing Court ought not to have passed the impugned order without any application for condonation of delay. He, therefore, would submit that the present petition may be allowed.

(3.) I have heard Mr. S.P. Majmudar, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner. I have also gone through the memo of application Exh.20 as well as the impugned order. It is an undisputed fact that Special Civil Suit No.195 of 1986 was decreed in favour of the respondents herein on 10.6.1997 and as per the same, the original Judgment Debtor was directed to pay an amount of Rs.13,500/- with 12% interest. Against the said decree, the original Judgment Debtor preferred Regular Civil Appeal No.139 of 2005 and the same came to be dismissed by District Court vide judgment dated 28.2.2013. Accordingly, Execution Application No.38 of 2013 was filed by the respondents herein before the Executing Court. Initially, notice was issued to the original Judgment Debtor i.e. father of the petitioner herein. The original Judgment Debtor did not remain present before the Executing Court on various occasions. Hence, summons came to be issued by the Executing Court to the original Judgment Debtor and on 11.1.2016, when the Bailiff of the Executing Court tried to serve the notice issued to the original Judgment Debtor, it came to the knowledge that the original Judgment Debtor had expired on 30.9.2014.