'Disgraceful': Gujarat High Court Slams Lawyer For Creating False Demolition Panic, Moving Midnight Appeal

The Gujarat High Court deprecated the conduct of an advocate who claimed that due to non-grant of injunction order by trial court, the authorities would demolish his clients' flats overnight, noting that he misused the high court's machinery by moving an appeal late at night without even ascertaining the correct facts. Calling his conduct "deplorable" and "disgraceful" the court said that the lawyer, being a senior member of the bar, must not forget that they are officers of the court and have a duty to provide assistance. The court was hearing an appeal by certain individuals who had filed a suit before trial court seeking declaration of ownership in flats built by Gujarat Housing Board, the lease for which is to expire in October 2086. On the manner in which the appeal was filed against the trial court's order Justice Maulik J Shelat said, "Learned advocate Mr. Mangukiya, who is a senior member of bar, practicing advocate of this Court, under the pretext that because of the non-granting of ad-interim injunction in favour of the plaintiffs by trial Court on 22.09.2025 (according to him, the impugned order made available late in the evening on 22.09.2025), defendants would demolish their flats overnight". The court said that the advocate for appellant, without ascertaining the "ground reality" and without taking sense of pleaders appearing for State & Authority, with respect to so called demolition proposed at 6:00 AM on 23.09.2025, "unnecessary troubled everyone" including high court's registry.It said:"...there was a hue and cry made by the learned advocate Mr. B.M. Mangukiya, appearing for the appellants, whereby he knocked the door of registry of this Court at wee hours on 22.09.2025, with urgent circulation note duly signed by him, which appears to have been received by official of registry at about 00:20 AM hours of 23.09.2025. Learned advocate Mr. B.M. Mangukiya requested for urgent circulation of present appeal in late night itself. The registry of this Court has taken serious note of such urgency sought by the learned advocate Mr. Mangukiya and as per procedure and rules of this High Court, first secured the administrative order of the Honourable the Chief Justice, circulated and placed the matter before this Court, today itself i.e. 23.09.2025".The court also observed that till the hearing of the matter concluded–at about 11:45 AM, no demolition work had been started by the respondents as alleged."Prima facie, after taking into account the following facts emerging from the record, and so also, noticed the aforesaid conduct of the appellants/plaintiffs and their advocate - learned advocate Mr. Mangukiya, it would surely indicate that yesterday late night (22.09.2025), an artificial urgency was created by learned advocate Mr. Mangukiya appearing for appellants/plaintiffs, inasmuch as for quite a long time after 02.09.2025, the plaintiffs did nothing in regards to approach the Civil Court at the first instance but instituted suit on 15.09.2025 through learned advocate Mr. Magukiya itself but waited till 22.09.2025 for hearing of injunction application..."The court said that there was nothing on the record to remotely suggest that as apprehended by the advocate in his note filed with the Registry while seeking urgent circulation of the appeal, that the authorities "were/are at the doorstep of the plaintiffs for demolition of their flats". "...misusing the machinery of this Court in such a manner, whereby putting everyone into motion at wee hours, that too without ascertaining the correct facts, according to this Court, the act of the learned advocate Mr. Mangukiya is highly deplorable, disgraceful and as such, condemnable, requires to be deprecated, on all counts. It should not be forgot by any lawyer that first of all, lawyer is an officer of court, owes his/her duty towards Court to provide his/her aid and assistance to the Court, which dispenses the justice to the litigant. Even such duty would be much more on shoulder of senior member of bar appearing before the Court. Once, senior member of bar fails in his/her duty, it passes on a wrong signal to other members of bar, who may tempted to do an act, not graceful. So, at least, this Court, in no terms, approves such disgraceful act of learned advocate Mr. Mangukiya, a senior member of bar of this Court"The court however said that it would not like to make any further comments on the advocate's conduct but "put him on guard that in future" in case the court finds that such practice is repeated by him it "will take very serious note of such conduct and will surely take cognizance, if so requires an appropriate action will be taken against him...".BackgroundThe flats built by the Board were to be sold/occupied by respective allottees as per the Board's scheme. As the flats became old over time and required redevelopment as per the scheme flat association after taking consent of over 75% of the occupiers,...

'Disgraceful': Gujarat High Court Slams Lawyer For Creating False Demolition Panic, Moving Midnight Appeal

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags