Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Spaze Towers Private Limited vs Jasbir Singh Bhandari on 15 April, 2025
1
ITEM NO.1743 COURT NO.9 SECTION XVII-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION Diary No(s). 26938/2024
SPAZE TOWERS PRIVATE LIMITED Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
JASBIR SINGH BHANDARI Respondent(s)
OFFICE REPORT FOR DIRECTION.
Date : 15-04-2025 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASANNA B. VARALE
[IN CHAMBER]
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Sanjana Manchanda, Adv. (through VC)
Mr. Archit Upadhayay, AOR
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gaurav Goel, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. The following order was passed on 07.11.2024 by the learned Chamber Judge, which reads as under;
“ Application for withdrawal of suitor’s fund amount has not been filed.
Let the notice be issued to the parties for filing the application for withdrawal of suitor’s fund amount, returnable within four weeks.” Signature Not Verified
2. A perusal of the office report dated 03.04.2025 Digitally signed by NITIN TALREJA Date: 2025.04.17 19:34:47 IST Reason: shows that the notice has been duly served and delivered on the respondent but the counsel appearing for the respective parties failed to file any application for 2 withdrawal of Suitor’s fund amount.
3. It may not be out of place to refer to the relevant Rule in respect of the disbursement of the Suitor’s Fund amount, and relevant Order XXIV Rule 7 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 reads as under;
“ If the appeal is allowed by the Court the amount deposited by the appellant would be refunded to him without interest but if its dismissed, the same will be allowed to be withdrawn by the respondent or may be disbursed as per the direction of the Court in that behalf”
4. A perusal of the Order dated 06.10.2023 passed in Civil Appeal No. 6520 of 2023, shows that this Court, did not found any reason to interfere with the well-reasoned order passed by NCDRC dated 28.12.2022, which was assailed by the appellant in the said Civil Appeal. The Division Bench, dismissed the said appeal by recording that the appeal is devoid of any merits.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submits before this Court that post the decision of this Court on 06.10.2023, the parties arrived at an amicable settlement. She further submits that the petitioner- company has undergone insolvency and the affairs of the petitioner-Company are now being looked upon by Resolution Professional (for short ‘RP’). She prays for sometime so as to apprise the RP so that they can file appropriate application for disbursement of the Suitor’s 3 Fund amount.
6. In my opinion, there is no justifiable reason so as to permit the RP to approach this Court by filing an application for disbursement of the Suitor’s Fund amount.
7. As per Order XXIV Rule 7 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, in case the appeal is allowed, the appellant would be entitled for refund of the Suitor’s Fund Amount without interest and if, the appeal is dismissed, the respondent would be permitted to withdraw the Suitor’s fund amount. Now, in the present case, admittedly the appeal is dismissed.
8. The notice was issued and delivered to the respondent(s) but till this date, no application for withdrawal of the Suitor’s Fund amount has been filed by the respondent(s) and as such, in my opinion, the third course open, as per Order XXIV Rule 7 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, is that the disbursement of the Suitor’s Fund amount shall be as per the direction of the Court.
9. Accordingly, the Registry is directed to deposit the Suitor’s fund amount of Rs.50,000/- in the account of Supreme Court Employees Welfare Association within two weeks from today.
4
10. The miscellaneous application is accordingly, disposed of.
(NISHA KHULBEY) (VINOD KUMAR) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT COURT MASTER (NSH)