Vikas Enterprise v. Maharashtra Rajya Sahakari Dudhmahasangh Maryadit

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2680 OF 2025 IN COMMERCIAL EXECUTION APPLICATION NO.46 OF 2025 VIKAS ENTERPRISE )...APPLICANT V/s.

MAHARASHTRA RAJYA SAHAKARI DUDH ) MAHASANGH MARYADIT )...RESPONDENT Mr.Shadab Jan a/w. Mr.Kshitij Parekh, Ms.Aradhya Dixit, Mr.Vonid Kothari i/by Apex Law Partners, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr.Sandesh Deshpande, Advocate for the Judgment Debtor.

CORAM

:

ABHAY AHUJA, J.

DATE :

8th DECEMBER 2025 P.C. :

1.

When the matter was called out in the morning session, it was kept back as the learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent had submitted that the amounts would be paid during the course of the day. 2.

When the matter is called out in the afternoon session, this Court is informed by Mr.Shadab Jan, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant, that neither the costs have been paid as directed by this Court nor the entire outstanding amount has been received and also no ARTI VILAS KHATATE disclosures have been made. Mr.Jan submits that only Rs.1,34,84,790/- by ARTI VILAS KHATATE Date:

2025.12.08 20:04:05 +0530 avk 1/4

has been received and that this Court may pass appropriate orders including issuance of notice under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 3.

It is quite surprising that despite directions of this Court in paragraph 8 of the order dated 13th October 2025 and only on the basis that time was being sought as and by way of last chance, subject to payment of costs of Rs.50,000/- to the Applicant within a period of three weeks, the payment of outstanding amount along with costs was permitted to be made within a period of four weeks thereafter. Disclosures in terms of the order dated 18th July 2025 were also directed to be made by today with a copy to the other side. The payment of Rs.1,34,84,790/- was to be made subject to costs of Rs.50,000/- to the Applicant. That has not been done. Disclosures have also not been made. Mr.Jan submits that the Respondent is a Government organization and yet it has failed to abide by the undertakings given to this Court. Mr.Jan submits that out of the outstanding amount other than costs of Rs.50,000/-, Rs.82,40,955/- is outstanding.

4.

Mr.Jan is right that this Court may consider passing appropriate orders including issuance of notice under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

avk 2/4

5.

Mr.Despande, learned Counsel for the Respondent, on instructions, submits that the entire outstanding amount including costs would be paid within a period of one week.

6.

While we have no doubt on Mr.Deshpande's impeccable reputation, we are not sure whether the Respondent has intention of abiding by this Court's orders. However, since Mr.Deshpande represents the Respondent in the matter, this Court directs that the matter be listed on 16th December 2025 on the Supplementary board for compliance.

7.

Keeping in view the conduct of this Respondent, this Court also directs a responsible officer of the Respondent to remain present in Court on the next date. This is so, because this Court has been informed that the Managing Director of the Respondent is an Officer from the IAS Cadre and we do not think that an officer of such a level should be disturbed.

8.

List on 16th December 2025 on the Supplementary board for compliance.

avk 3/4

(ABHAY AHUJA, J.) avk 4/4