33
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ MAC.APP.No.273/2009
Date of Decision: 23rd July, 2009
%
SARDAR JASWANT SINGH
OBERIO & ORS. ..... Appellants
Through : Mr. O.P. Mannie, Adv.
versus
SHIV SHANKAR & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through : Mr. Kanwal Choudhary, Adv.
CORAM :-
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA
1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may Yes
be allowed to see the Judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes
3. Whether the judgment should be Yes
reported in the Digest?
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. The appellant has challenged the order of the learned Tribunal whereby the execution application has been dismissed by the learned Tribunal.
2. The accident dated 25th February, 1994 resulted in the death of Sardar Charanjit Singh Oberoi. The deceased was survived by his minor son and parents who filed the claim petition before the learned Tribunal. The learned Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.13,77,000/- along with interest @12% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization vide award dated 14th May, 1999. MAC .APP.No.273/2009 Page 1 of 4
3. Respondent No.3 challenged the award before this Court vide FAO No.392/1999 which was admitted on 2 nd September, 1999. Vide ex-parte order dated 2nd September, 1999, this Court directed that 50% of the award amount along with proportionate interest be released to the claimants and the remaining 50% of the award amount along with proportionate interest be deposited by respondent No.3 with the learned Tribunal within eight weeks.
4. In terms of the order dated 2nd September, 1999, respondent No.3 deposited 50% of the award amount along with proportionate interest which was released to the petitioner. However, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the remaining 50% of the award amount along with interest was not deposited and, therefore, the petitioner filed CM No.639/2000 which was disposed of vide order dated 26th July, 2000. It was directed that the remaining 50% of the award amount be paid over to the petitioners on furnishing of the security to the satisfaction of the learned Tribunal.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he did not receive any notice of deposit made in terms of the order dated 26th July, 2000.
6. Vide order dated 9th January, 2008, the appeal of respondent No.3 was dismissed of this Court.
7. On 20th August, 2008, the petitioner filed the execution before the learned Tribunal in pursuance to which MAC .APP.No.273/2009 Page 2 of 4 respondent No.3 deposited Rs.11,11,547/- on 5th December, 2008. The petitioners have withdrawn the said amount.
8. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, respondent No.3 has paid the interest on 50% of the award amount up to July, 2000 and the interest from July, 2000 to December, 2008 is due and payable which amounts to Rs.7,47,453/-.
9. There is no dispute that the entire award amount has been paid by respondent No.3. The dispute is with respect to the payment of interest on 50% of the award amount from July, 2000 to December, 2008.
10. The learned Tribunal has not considered the contentions raised by the petitioner and has also not given the reasons in the impugned order. The petitioner's execution application has been dismissed by an unreasoned cryptic order.
11. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 28 th February, 2009 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the learned Tribunal to consider the matter afresh after hearing both the parties and to pass a reasoned order dealing with all the contentions raised by the petitioner. Nothing contained herein be construed any opinion on the merits of this case.
12. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Tribunal on 20th August, 2009.
MAC .APP.No.273/2009 Page 3 of 4
13. Copy of this order be given 'Dasti' to learned counsel for the parties under the signature of Court Master.
J.R. MIDHA, J JULY 23, 2009 aj MAC .APP.No.273/2009 Page 4 of 4