SCA/30311/2007 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 30311 of 2007 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= KANSARA HIRALAL NATWARLAL & 2 - Petitioner(s) Versus CHIMANBHAI RANCHHODBHAI SHAH & 2 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR PF ADHVARYU for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 3. None for Respondent(s) : 1 - 3, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3,3.2.4 ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER Date : 24/06/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 17.7.2008 passed below Exh.89 in execution proceedings No.84 of 1994. SCA/30311/2007 2/4 JUDGMENT 2. Mr. Adhvaryu appeared on behalf of the petitioners and submitted that the petitioners herein desired to examine certain witnesses in the proceedings related to Regular Darkhast No.84 of 1994 and also desired that certain documents may be duly exhibited. For the said purpose, application on behalf of the petitioners was moved requesting the Court to permit the applicants of the said application (Exh.89) to examine certain witnesses. By order dated 17.7.2007, the learned Court has rejected the said application. In submission of Mr. Adhvaryu the said order is unjustified and errornous. 3. On perusal of the order, it transpires that the learned Court has examined the application properly and has taken into account that the proceedings before the Court in which application is preferred are “execution proceedings” and therefore, it has held that there was no justification or need for examining SCA/30311/2007 3/4 JUDGMENT any witness or production of documents during the execution proceedings. The learned Court has also recorded that the applicants were not able to point out any provision or any authority under which such an application can be maintained or entertained. The learned Court, being of a view that in execution proceedings there is no scope of examining witness or for production of documents / evidence and that there was neither justification nor any need to examine any witness in the execution proceedings, rejected the application and rightly so. Even otherwise, the petitioner – applicant has not made out, as can be seen from perusal of the application, any case and/or has not given any cogent reason or ground for such opportunity. The petitioner has failed to give any legally tenable and cogent justification in support of the prayer in its application. This Court, therefore, does not find any error or material irregularity or illegality in the said order hence, present petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. SCA/30311/2007 4/4 JUDGMENT Kdc [K.M.Thaker, J.]