Calcutta High Court
D.D. Champati Ray vs Union Of India on 22 September, 2009
Author: Patherya
Bench: Patherya
GA No. 2403 of 2009
With
EC NO.43 OF 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
D.D. CHAMPATI RAY Plaintiff/Petitioner/Applicant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA Defendant/Respondent
For Plaintiff/Petitioner : MR. ARINDAM MUKHERJEE For Defendant/Respondent : MR. DINESH CHANDRA ROY WITH MR. DHRUBA MUKHERJEE BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 22nd September, 2009.
The Court : This is an application for execution of an award date 10th July, 2000.
By the said award, counter claim was allowed and in an application filed under section 34 of the 1996 Act, such counter claim was rejected. Therefore the amount claimed by the decree holder was allowed and although an appeal was filed, the same was dismissed.
By virtue of the order passed on section 34 application, a sum of Rs.1,82,175/- became due and payable by the judgment debtor to the decree holder. As the admitted sum has already been paid, the disputed sum was also paid subsequently on dismissal of the appeal. It is only for the interest awarded by order dated 25th March, 2008 that orders 2 were sought in E.C.No.43 of 2008. The said execution case was disposed of by order dated 10th December, 2008 directing payments to be made by the judgment debtor and in default, the Reserve Bank of India was directed to make payment on demand made.
On the basis of the said order, the execution application was disposed of. Subsequently it came to the knowledge of the decree holder that no account was maintained with the Reserve Bank of India, Calcutta. Hence the instant application has been filed and orders sought.
Counsel for the judgement debtor submits that under the award interest was awarded on the security deposit of Rs.1,00,000/-. This will appear from the reasonings of the award. As an appeal was filed and till disposal of appeal the decree holder will not be entitled to any interest thereon. Interest if at all payable can be only calculated from the date the appeal was disposed of and till the order dated 10th December, 2008 on the balance sum which has been added to the award upon dismissal of the section 34 application. The said sum is the only sum due and payable to the decree holder. An appeal has also been filed on 17th September, 2009 from the order dated 25th March, 2008, as the judgment debtor was not aware of the said order passed, the same being exparte without notice to the judgment debtor.
Having considered the submissions of the parties although an appeal has been filed from order dated 25th March, 2008 which provides for payment of interest no stay has been granted thereon. In any event the said order dated 25th March, 2008 has merged with the order dated 10th December, 2008 which directs payments to be made. Accordingly, the contentions of the judgment debtor cannot be accepted and the judgment debtor is directed to make payment of interest as directed by order dated 10th December, 2008 within two weeks from the date of receipt of this order. 3
In default, the bankers of the judgment debtor, namely, Punjab National Bank, Behala Branch, Dimond Harbour Road, Calcutta-700034 is directed to make payment of the balance sum lying in the account of the judgment debtor forthwith on demand being made.
This order is passed as the judgment debtor do not maintain an account with the Reserve Bank of India, Calcutta and has now an account lying in the Bank mentioned above.
It is, however, made clear that this order is subject to the result of the appeal which has been filed. In the event, the judgement debtor is successful in the appeal filed, the decree holder will refund amounts on account of interest and for such purposes will furnish an undertaking to the satisfaction of the Registrar, Original Side, High Court, Calcutta by 23rd September, 2009.
With the aforesaid direction, this application is disposed of.
As no reply has been filed to the affidavit of the judgment debtor, the allegations contained in the affidavit are not admitted.
Counsel for the decree holder in reply disputes the filing of the appeal as no copy of the memorandum of appeal or stay application has been served on it.
Punjab National Bank, Behala Branch, Calcutta and all parties concerned are to act on a xerox signed copy of this order on the usual undertakings.
( PATHERYA, J.) S.Bhattacharyya Assistant Registrar(C.R.)