Veraval Peoples Cooperative Bank Ltd., vs Bharat Coal Depot on 2 May, 2019

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Veraval Peoples Cooperative Bank Ltd., vs Bharat Coal Depot on 2 May, 2019

Bench: Bela M. Trivedi

         C/SCA/5609/2018                                    ORDER




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

           R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5609 of 2018

==========================================================
            VERAVAL PEOPLES COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.,
                            Versus
                      BHARAT COAL DEPOT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SOPARKAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR HARSHESH R KAKKAD(7813)
for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR RC KAKKAD(389) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
 for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR DIPAL R RAVAIYA(6532) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4,5
NOTICE SERVED BY DS(5) for the Respondent(s) No. 6,7
MR MEHUL S SHAH, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH SHYAMAL K
BHIMANI(8233) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4,5
==========================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI

                           Date : 02/05/2019

                             ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties.

2. Rule. Mr. Shyamal Bhimani waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 5.

3. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Soparkar appearing for the petitioner requests to extend the adinterim relief granted by the Court while issuing Notice on 18.04.2018 directing the respondent No. 1 to 5 to maintain status quo as regards the ownership rights of the properties being Kita No. CTikko Mapani No. 652 Case No. 303/94 Paiki 387.03 Sq. Mtrs. on its northern side. However, the same has been opposed by learned Senior Advocate Mr. Mehul Shah appearing for the respondents by submitting that the entire decreetal dues with Page 1 of 2 Downloaded on : Tue Jun 25 04:08:59 IST 2019 C/SCA/5609/2018 ORDER simple rate of interest has already been paid up and the title deeds of the property in question have also been released by the petitioner Bank. He also submits that the petitioner having failed in the proceedings before the Board of Nominees and the Tribunal in respect of compound interest claimed by it, the question of the respondents maintaining status quo in respect of the property in question does not arise.

4. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned Advocates appearing for the parties and to the documents on record, more particularly the impugned orders passed by the Board of Nominees and the Tribunal, it appears that the only issue involved in the present petition is whether the Courts below had erred in not awarding the suit claim with compound rate of interest. Since the issue requires to be considered in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Central Bank of India versus Ravindra and Others reported in (2002) 1 SCC 367, the matter has been admitted. However, the petitioner having lost in both the Courts below, and since the title documents of the property in question have already been released by the petitioner and the possession of the property is also with the respondents, there is no requirement of continuing the adinterim relief granted earlier. Hence, the adinterim relief stands vacated forthwith.

5. The request made by learned Senior Advocate Mr. Soparkar to continue the adinterim relief for a week to challenge this order before the higher forum is also rejected for reasons stated above.

(BELA M. TRIVEDI, J) SINDHU NAIR Page 2 of 2 Downloaded on : Tue Jun 25 04:08:59 IST 2019

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court