SHUBHESH DILIP JAIN v. M/S SHRIRAM CITY UNION FINANCE LTD THROUGH GPA HOLDEER INDRAJEET MAHAJAN AND OTHERS
WP/5017/2023 · 2026-09-15
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 10795 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 10795 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
3-sr15.wp5017.2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 15 WRIT PETITION NO. 5017 OF 2023 Shubhesh Dilip Jain VERSUS M/s Shriram City Union Finance Ltd. Through G.P.A. Holder Indrajeet Mahajan And Others ---- Mr.B.R.Warmaa, Advocate for petitioner Mr.V.Y.Bhide, Advocate for respondent no.1 ----
CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 15, 2026
ORDER :-
Considering that a very short issue is raised by the petitioner in this petition, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition at admission stage.
2. Suffice it to note that the petitioner is a guarantor to the credit facility advanced by the respondent – financial institution to the original borrower. It appears that the recovery proceedings was initiated and the matter went before the Arbitrator. The Arbitrator after hearing the parties passed the judgment and award. In execution proceedings of the award, a number of applications were filed by the decree holder seeking execution for recovery of their dues. 2026:BHC-AUG:42807
2 3-sr15.wp5017
3. The petitioner, as argued by Mr.Warma, learned advocate for the petitioner, has apprehension of his immediate arrest following the applications filed by the decree holder at Exhs.76, 90 and 142. Suffice it to note, the process of arrest of a Judgment Debtor is regulated by Order XXI Rule 40 of the Code of Civil Procedure (C.P.C.). Rules 37, 38 and 39 of C.P.C. also speak about the procedure for the purpose of effecting arrest of the Judgment Debtor.
4. Prima facie it appears that the operative clauses of the impugned order dated 20.04.2023 in fact do not cause any prejudice to the petitioner. However, considering the restricted prayer advanced by Mr.Warma, learned advocate for the petitioner while arguing the matter, it is clarified that the order of detaining/jailing the petitioner shall be subject to compliance to the process prescribed in Order XXI Rule 40 of C.P.C. is followed. In view of this, no more directions are warranted at this juncture.
5. The Writ Petition stands disposed of.
[AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.] ………..
KBP