Himachal Pradesh High Court
Ex. Havildar Sarwan Singh vs . Ajay Singh & Anr. on 21 December, 2024
Author: Sushil Kukreja
Bench: Sushil Kukreja
Ex. Havildar Sarwan Singh Vs. Ajay Singh & Anr. FAO No. 51/2019 20.12.2024 Present: Mr. Devinder Kumar, Mr. Dalip K. Kataria and Mr. Ajay Chauhan, Advocates, for the appellant.
Mr. Bhuvnesh Sharma, Senior Advocate with Ms. Vishali Lakhanpal, Advocate, for respondent No. 1.
Mr. Bhupinder Pathania, Advocate, for respondent No. 2.
CMP No. 2514/2024[ The present application under Rule 41, Order 19, read with Section 151 CPC has been filed against the order dated 22.12.2022, whereby, the present appeal was ordered to be dismissed in default. The application is duly supported with the affidavit of learned counsel for the appellant.
Reply to the application has been filed, wherein, contents of the application are denied and dismissal of the same has been prayed.
In rejoinder to the reply, contents of the application are reiterated and contents of the reply are denied.
Heard. Having regard to the averments made in the application, more particularly paragraphs 2 and 3 thereof, which is duly supported with the affidavit of learned counsel for the appellant and also in the interest of justice, the same is allowed, subject to the costs of Rs.
....2...
10,000/- to be paid to respondent No. 1/claimant before the next date of hearing. Accordingly, order dated 22.12.2022, whereby, the present appeal was ordered to be dismissed in default, is recalled and the appeal is ordered to be restored to its original number.
The application stands disposed of. CMP No. 17194/2023 The present application under Section 151 CPC has been maintained by applicant/respondent No. 1, Ajay Singh, for release of the award amount, lying deposited in the Registry of this Court, alongwith up-to- date interest. The application is duly supported with the affidavit of the applicant.
Reply to the application has been filed, wherein, contents of the application are denied and dismissal of the same has been prayed.
Learned counsel for the non-
applicant/appellant opposed the prayer made in the application on the ground that in the event of appeal being allowed, it would be difficult for the appellant to recover the amount, so released.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the records.
...3...
As per the applicant, he has suffered multiple injuries in the accident and got 47% disabled, on account of which, he lost his Army service. He has also submitted that he has spent more than rupees five lacs towards his treatment and due to fracture in both the legs, he is unable to walk independently and is undergoing physiotherapy every day.
Heard. Having perused the averments made in the application, which are duly supported with the affidavit of the applicant, coupled with the fact that the award was passed as far back as in the year 2018 and the present appeal pertains to the year, 2019 and the same is not likely to be decided in near future, this Court finds it in the interest of justice to release 25% of the award amount, falling in the share of applicant/respondent No. 1, Ajay Singh, lying deposited in the Registry of this Court, alongwith up-to-date interest, after proper verification and identification by remitting the same to his bank account, details whereof have been given in para-3 of the application.
It is made clear that release of the award amount shall be subject to final outcome of the appeal and in the event of appeal being allowed, ...4...
applicant/respondent No. 1 will have to refund the amount, so released, with interest @ 6% per annum.
The application stands disposed of.
( Sushil Kukreja ) Judge 20th December, 2024 (raman)