NATHABHAI JETHABHAI ROHIT vs BECIS SOLAR 5 PRIVATE LIMITED

Court
Gujarat High Court

C/SCA/16179/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/10/2026
(GJHC240819102026)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16179 of 2026

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT

==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
NATHABHAI JETHABHAI ROHIT & ORS.
Versus
BECIS SOLAR 5 PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR APURVA R KAPADIA(5012) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3
MR SIDDHANT K GUJARATHI(10789) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT

Date : 30/10/2026

JUDGMENT
1. Heard Mr. Apurva R. Kapadia, learned advocate for
the petitioners and Mr. Siddhant K. Gujarathi, learned
advocate for the respondent No. 1 – caveator, the main
contesting respondent. In view of the order which is
going to be passed by this Court in this matter, at this
stage, the presence of respondent Nos. 2 to 4 is not
required.
2. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Siddhant K. Gujarathi,
Page 1 of 6
Uploaded by SYED SHAHANAZ(HC02353) on Fri Oct 30 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 31 01:01:10 IST 2026

C/SCA/16179/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/10/2026
(GJHC240819102026)
learned advocate, waives service of rule for and on behalf
of respondent No. 1.
3. With the consent of learned advocates for the
respective parties, the matter is taken up for hearing.
4. This petition is filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs:
“(a) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to admit and allow this
petition.
(b) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue an appropriate
writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the order dated
25.08.2026 passed below Exh. 5 in Regular Civil Suit No. 23 of
2026 by the learned Principal Civil Judge, Tilakwada, District
Narmada, at Annexure-A and further be pleased to quash and set
aside the judgment and order dated 17.10.2026 passed by the
learned Additional District Judge, Narmada at Rajpipla in Civil
Miscellaneous Appeal No. 9 of 2026 at Annexure-B;
(c) Pending hearing and final disposal of this petition, Your
Lordships may be pleased to stay the operation, execution and
implementation of the impugned orders dated 25.08.2026 passed
below Exh. 5 in Regular Civil Suit No. 23 of 2026 by the learned
Principal Civil Judge, Tilakwada, District Narmada, at Annexure-
A, and the judgment and order dated 17.10.2026 passed by the
learned Additional District Judge, Narmada at Rajpipla in Civil
Miscellaneous Appeal No. 9 of 2026 at Annexure-B;
(d) Grant such other and further relief as may be deemed just and
proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
5. At the outset, Mr. Kapadia, learned advocate for the
petitioners, would submit that without giving a
reasonable opportunity to defend the injunction in the
Page 2 of 6
Uploaded by SYED SHAHANAZ(HC02353) on Fri Oct 30 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 31 01:01:10 IST 2026

C/SCA/16179/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/10/2026
(GJHC240819102026)
application, in haste, the Trial Court adjudicated the
impugned injunction application filed by the respondent
No. 1 – original plaintiff. It is submitted that notice was
issued in the suit on 13.08.2026 making it returnable on
24.08.2026 and the matter was kept on 25.08.2026 and
on that day, the petitioners – original defendant No. 4 to 6
sought time, which was opposed and denied by the Trial
Court and ultimately, in absence of any written
objections/reply of the petitioners herein, the Trial Court
vide its impugned order dated 25.08.2026 partly allowed
the impugned injunction application.

5.1. Mr. Kapadia, learned advocate, would request this
Court that the matter requires to be remanded back to
the Trial Court for re-adjudicating the injunction
application filed by the respondent No. 1 and after giving
an opportunity of hearing to the parties including the
petitioners, the injunction application may be decided
afresh.
5.2. Making the above submissions, Mr. Kapadia, learned
Page 3 of 6
Uploaded by SYED SHAHANAZ(HC02353) on Fri Oct 30 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 31 01:01:10 IST 2026

C/SCA/16179/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/10/2026
(GJHC240819102026)
advocate, would request this Court to allow this
application.
6. Per contra , Mr. Gujarathi, learned advocate for the
respondent No. 1 – caveator – plaintiff, under the
instruction of his client, would state that if this Court is
inclined to remand the matter to the Trial Court for a
fresh hearing of injunction application filed below
Exhibit-5 in the suit, the respondent No. 1 has no
objection, but the status quo which is prevailing as on
date may be continued till final outcome of the injunction
application filed by the respondent No. 1 herein.
7. No other and further submissions have been
advanced by learned advocates for the respective parties.
8. Having heard learned Counsels for the respective
parties and considering the fact that no reasonable
opportunity was given to the petitioners herein to
respond to the injunction application by the Trial Court,
without further expressing anything on merit I am
inclined to accept the request made on behalf of the
Page 4 of 6
Uploaded by SYED SHAHANAZ(HC02353) on Fri Oct 30 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 31 01:01:10 IST 2026

C/SCA/16179/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/10/2026
(GJHC240819102026)
petitioners, so far as remand of the matter is concerned.
It appears that despite the aforesaid facts brought to the
notice of the Appellate Court, unfortunately the Appellate
Court has not exercised its discretion at the stage of
appeal, which ultimately resulted into filing this petition
at the hands of original defendants Nos.4 to 6.
Accordingly, I pass the following order:
8.1. The impugned order dated 17.10.2026 passed by
Additional District Court, Narmada at Rajpipla in Civil
Miscellaneous Application No.9 of 2026 as well as
impugned order dated 25.08.2026 passed by Principal
Civil Judge, Tilakwada, District – Narmada below
Exhibit–5 in Regular Civil Suit No. 23 of 2026 is hereby
quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded to the
Trial Court.
8.2. The impugned injunction application filed below
Exhibit-5 by the respondent No. 1 herein in the aforesaid
suit is restored back on its original file. The Trial Court is
hereby directed to decide a fresh injunction application
filed by the respondent No. 1 after giving reasonable
Page 5 of 6
Uploaded by SYED SHAHANAZ(HC02353) on Fri Oct 30 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 31 01:01:10 IST 2026

C/SCA/16179/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/10/2026
(GJHC240819102026)
opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned. It
goes without saying that while adjudicating the impugned
application, the Trial Court shall not to be influenced by
its earlier impugned order dated 25.08.2026 as well as
the impugned order dated 17.10.2026 passed by the
Appellate Court in Civil Miscellaneous Application No.9 of
2026.
8.3. The status quo which is prevailing as on date shall
remain continue till final outcome of the impugned
injunction application.
9. In view of the foregoing discussions and reasons, the
present petition is partly allowed. Rule is made absolute
to the aforesaid extent. No order as to costs.
Direct service is permitted.
(MAULIK J.SHELAT,J)
SHAHANAZ
Page 6 of 6
Uploaded by SYED SHAHANAZ(HC02353) on Fri Oct 30 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 31 01:01:10 IST 2026