IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 240 of 2024 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2026 In R/APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 240 of 2024 ================================================================

VELJI KUNVARJI VARSANI Versus DAYALAL SHAMJI VAGHELA & ORS.

================================================================

Appearance:

MR NV GANDHI(1693) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4,6,7 ================================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI Date : 19/02/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. N.V. Gandhi for the appellant. 2. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that MACP claim petition came to be decided in absence of present appellant who was impleaded as opponent No.2 in the MACP proceedings. It is further submitted that knowledge about passing an ex parte award is attributed to a notice issued in execution proceedings to the appellant. Thereafter, an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) came to be filed for setting aside ex parte judgment and award. It is further submitted that in the proceedings, a witness summons, calling upon the RTO Kutch Bhuj to produce the documentary evidence with regard to the registration of Truck No.GJ-12-U- 7544. It is emphatically submitted by learned advocate for the appellant that on the date of accident, present appellant was neither owner of the truck in question nor in possession of the offending truck. Pursuant to the application, the RTO Officer of Kutch at Bhuj submitted documents. It is submitted that on prima facie appreciation of the copy of RC book which is produced on page No.44 of the paper-book, the offending vehicle stands in the name of Arjan Vanidar and the transfer was effected way back in 2016. However, learned executing Court while rejecting the application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code did not consider this vital piece of evidence and only on the aspect that the present appellant has remained absent in the original proceedings.

3. Considering the submissions canvassed by learned advocate for the appellant and considering the documents placed on record, the issue requires consideration, the present Appeal from Order stands admitted.

4. In the meantime, appellant is directed to deposit the decretal amount except interest and cost before the learned Executing Court within a period of 8 weeks from today.

5. On depositing the decretal amount, the further proceedings of the Execution Petition No.132 of 2023 pending before the learned 8^th Additional District Judge, Bhuj-Kachchh shall stand stayed.

Stand over to 09.04.2026.

(D. M. DESAI,J)

RINKU MALI