Court reprimands respondent for inappropriate video conferencing conduct and mandates true and full affidavit compliance under Order XXI CPC by October 21, 2026, warning of further execution measures
In a significant ruling dated October 12, 2026, the Bombay High Court, presided over by Justice Gauri Godse, dealt with execution proceedings in the matter of Tata Capital Housing Finance Limited versus Heera Construction Company Private Ltd and others. The case revolves around the enforcement of an arbitral award and the crucial disclosure of assets by the judgment-debtor/director as mandated under Order XXI of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.
The Court addressed an application for exemption from personal appearance filed on behalf of respondent no. 2, who claimed medical inability to travel, supported by a certificate from an Ayurvedic center. However, during the video conferencing (VC) session, the Court observed that the respondent was participating while lying on a bed without clothes, a conduct described as "deprecable." Justice Godse directed the respondent to leave the VC and issued a stern warning that such behavior is unacceptable in court proceedings. Although exemption from personal appearance was granted for the day, the respondent was ordered to either appear personally or submit proper medical documentation on the next hearing date.
The core issue before the Court was the respondent's compliance with earlier orders dated January 16, 2026, and February 4, 2026, which required a comprehensive affidavit disclosing all movable and immovable properties and assets, whether encumbered or unencumbered, from April 1, 2016, onward. The affidavits filed by respondent no. 2 in December 2025 and October 6, 2026, were scrutinized. The Court found that these affidavits contained partial and guarded disclosures, with no unequivocal statement that no other assets existed beyond those mentioned. Specifically, the October affidavit included a caveat that no property was "free and available for attachment and sale," which the Court ruled as insufficient compliance with its directions.
In light of this, the Court granted respondent no. 2 a final opportunity to file an appropriate, truthful, and complete affidavit with supporting documents including income tax returns, bank statements, and particulars of all assets and receivables from April 1, 2016. This affidavit must be filed by October 21, 2026, with an advance copy served on the applicant's advocate. The Court warned that failure to comply would prompt it to consider further execution measures under Order XXI CPC, including potential cost imposition for non-service of affidavits.
The case has broader implications for execution proceedings, emphasizing the judiciary's insistence on full transparency and candor from judgment-debtors, especially in matters involving financial institutions and large-scale asset recovery. The Court's observation on decorum during virtual hearings also signals strict expectations of conduct in the increasingly common use of technology in judicial processes.
The matter is scheduled to be heard next on October 26, 2026.
Bottom Line:
Execution proceedings - Disclosure affidavit by judgment-debtor/director - Affidavits containing partial or guarded disclosures are not due compliance with court directions requiring disclosure of all movable and immovable assets, whether encumbered or unencumbered - Last opportunity granted to file true and correct affidavit with supporting documents, failing which court may pass further directions under Order XXI of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.
Statutory provision(s): Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Order XXI
