GOOL RUSI VATCHA THORU. POA VIRAF RUSI VATCHA vs NAZIYA WASIM SHAIKH AND ORS

Judgment text excerpt

Neeta Sawant WP 3565 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3565 OF 2026 Gool Rusi Vatcha through Viraf Rusi Vatcha ….PETITIONER VERSUS. Naziya Wasim Shaikh & Ors. ….RESPONDENTS ___________ Mr. Nirman Sharma with Mr. Deeshank Doshi and Ms. Uma Sharma i/b. Dharam & Co., for the Petitioner Mr. M.A. Vaid with Ms. Vidhya N. Shet i/b. Vaid & Associates for Respondent No.1. CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J JUDG. RESD. ON: 07 APRIL 2026. JUDG. PRON. ON: 22 APRIL 2026. JUDGMENT: 1) The extent of inquiry to be conducted by the Executing Court under Order 21 Rule 101 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Code) when objection of the obstructor is found to be ex facie baseless is the issue involved in the Petition. Whether it is necessary to conduct a full-fledged inquiry like a trial in the suit in every obstruction application filed under Order 21 Rule 97 or Rule 99 on account of use of the words ‘all questions’ coupled with impermissibility to file a fresh suit under Rule 101 of Order ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ PAGE NO. 1 of 24 22 APRIL 2026 Neeta Sawant WP 3565 of 2026 21 or whether in a given case, it is permissible to conduct a summary inquiry for rejection of baseless obstruction claim? 2) The issue arises in the light of challenge raised by the Petitioner-decree holder to the judgment and order dated 27 November 2025 passed by the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court allowing Execution Appeal No. 95 of 2023 and setting aside Trial Court’s judgment and order dated 6 May 2023 passed in Obstructionist Notice No.43 of 2023. The Appellate Court has remanded the proceedings to the Trial Court for fresh decision by providing due opportunity to both