Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Vodafone Idea Limited vs Shri. Sandeep Singhal And Anr on 21 January, 2022

Author: Madhav J. Jamdar

Bench: G.S. Patel, Madhav J. Jamdar

                                                                      901-FAST-1339-2020.DOC




                   Shephali



                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                   FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO. 1339 OF 2020


                   Vodafone Idea Limited                                       ...Appellant
                        Versus
                   Sandeep Singhal & Anr                                    ...Respondents

                                                     WITH
                                 INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 811 OF 2020
                                                       IN
                                   FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO. 1339 OF 2020



                   Ms Fereshte Sethna, with Abhishek Tilak & Shivani Sanghvi, i/b
                        DMD Advocates, for the Appellant.
                   Mr Mahendra B Limaye, with Abhay Warik, for Respondent No. 1.


                                            CORAM        G.S. Patel &
                                                         Madhav J. Jamdar, JJ.
                                            DATED:       21st January 2022
SHEPHALI
SANJAY             PC:-
MORMARE

Digitally signed
by SHEPHALI
SANJAY
MORMARE
Date: 2022.01.21
15:37:00 +0530

1. The proceeding challenges an order of the Telecom Disputes Settlement Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. That order is of 20th December 2019.

Page 1 of 3

21st January 2022 901-FAST-1339-2020.DOC

2. Mr Limaye for the 1st Respondent raises a point of territorial jurisdiction. Both sides have much to say on this. including inviting attention to various statutes, rules, gazette notifications etc. In the current situation of online hearings only, it is difficult to fully assess all this material.

3. By the order under Appeal, the Appellant was directed to make payment to the 1st Respondent of an amount of Rs. 15 Lakhs as damages/compensation. The 2nd Respondent bank was confronted with an order of Rs. 3.5 Lakhs, which it has paid. There is also an order for payment of interest at the rate of 9% per annum from June 2018. Additional costs have been awarded at Rs. 25,000/- and interest has been awarded on those costs as well.

4. In order to protect and balance the rights of the parties, we direct the Appellants to deposit an amount of Rs. 15 Lakhs with the Registrar General of this Court by 28th January 2022. This is to be accompanied by an undertaking by a duly authorised officer to make payment of the interest component if so directed by this Court. The undertaking will also cover the question of costs and interest on costs. On deposit, the amount is to be invested in accordance with the usual practices of the office.

5. We propose to take this matter at the earliest possible at a physical hearing. We tentatively list the matter on 7th February 2022 at 2.30 pm. We will hear both sides on that date. Until then, and subject to the Appellant making the deposit and furnishing the Page 2 of 3 21st January 2022 901-FAST-1339-2020.DOC undertaking as aforesaid, execution of the impugned order will be stayed.

6. We clarify that if the deposit and undertaking are not made/ furnished by 28th January 2022, this stay will automatically cease without requiring a further order of the Court. The undertaking may initially may be furnished by email or e-file. A hard copy may filed at a later stage.

7. All concerned will act on production of a digitally signed copy of this order.

(Madhav J. Jamdar, J)                                (G. S. Patel, J)




                               Page 3 of 3
                            21st January 2022