Stay granted in pending civil appeals confirmed by consensus while directing time-bound adjudication.

The petitioners filed two Special Civil Applications under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging orders dated July 2, 2026, passed by the 4th Additional District Judge, Surat, below Exhibit-24 and Exhibit-25.

These orders arose from Regular Civil Appeals (No. 114 and 113 of 2026) concerning a 20-year-old suit and counterclaim instituted in 2003.

During the proceedings, the parties reached a consensus regarding the quashing of the impugned orders and the continuation of the ad-interim stay granted by the Appellate Court.

1. Whether the impugned orders passed by the Appellate Court below Exhibit-24 and Exhibit-25 should be quashed and set aside based on the consensus between the parties.

2. Whether the ad-interim stay granted in favor of the petitioners should continue pending the final disposal of the appeals.

3. Whether directions for the expedited adjudication of the long-pending appeals are maintainable.

The Court exercised its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to ensure the ends of justice through the principle of consensus ad idem (meeting of the minds) between litigants.

It also applied principles of judicial economy and procedural fairness, recognizing the right of a party to seek mesne profits during the pendency of an appeal and the necessity of expediting century-old litigations as per previous court directions.

The Court noted that the main contesting respondent (Respondent No. 1) filed affidavits stating no objection to quashing the challenged orders, provided the stay granted on July 2, 2026, continued until final adjudication.

The Court observed that the underlying suit had been pending for over 20 years despite previous directions for early disposal.

Since both parties agreed (consensus ad idem), the Court found it fit to set aside the specific orders below Exhibit-24 and Exhibit-25 while confirming the stay order below Exhibit-5.

Furthermore, the Court balanced the interests by granting Respondent No. 1 liberty to apply for mesne profits and instructing the Appellate Court to prioritize the appeals.

The Court directed that the ad-interim stay granted on July 2, 2026, shall continue until the final adjudication of the appeals.

Respondent No. 1 was granted liberty to apply for mesne profits before the Appellate Court.

The Appellate Court was requested to decide the appeals on or before March 31, 2027, provided the parties cooperate.