Navigating Obstruction Proceedings, Third-Party Claims, and the Limits of Executing Court Powers Under the Civil Procedure Code

sketch of the Bombay High Court
Case
SAMEER DINKARRAO JAVALEKAR v. GULAB HARIBHAU LADKAT (SINCE DECD) THROUGH LRS. AND ORS. (Bombay High Court, 16-10-2026)
Law
Bombay Rents Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, Code of Civil Procedure.

Highlights of the Judgment:

  • Examination of the maintainability of Section 47 CPC applications by third-party obstructionists.
  • Delineation of the distinct spheres of Section 47 and Order XXI Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
  • Analysis of the principle that an executing court cannot go behind a binding decree to review its correctness or jurisdiction.
  • Interpretation of statutory provisions regarding the scope of inquiry into third-party claims in execution proceedings.
  • Assessment of procedural mandates under Order XXI Rule 97 regarding whether decree-holders must file formal written replies prior to adducing evidence.