Iffco Tokio General Insurance ... vs Mr. [email protected] ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 2375 Bom

P.H. Jayani                                      16(b) 1327.2022.doc

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                 INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1327 OF 2022
                                  IN
                     FIRST APPEAL NO. 427 OF 2020

Iffco Tokio General Insurance Ltd.                 .... Applicant
            v/s.
Mr. Pankaj @ Pankajkumar Manikchand
Tatiya and ors.                                    .... Respondents


Mr. Abhijeet P. Kulkarni for the Applicant.
Mr. Siddharth N. i/b. TRD Associates for Respondent No.4.


                        CORAM: SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.

DATED : 09th MARCH, 2022.

P. C. :-

. By this Application, the Appellant - Insurance Company has

sought stay of the execution and implementation of the impugned

judgment and award dated 07/01/2017 in MACP No.264/2011.

2. The Appellant has stated that by order dated 05/08/2019, this

Court (Coram : K.K. Tated, J.) had granted ad-interim stay subject to

deposit of the entire decreetal amount with the lower Court. It is

stated that the claim was handled by Mumbai CSC office from 2017

and that w.e.f. April, 2019, various offices outside Mumbai have been

handled for the purpose of litigation pertaining to the regions out of

P.H. Jayani 16(b) 1327.2022.doc

Mumbai resulting in shifting of relevant papers from Mumbai to the

other offices. It is stated that in the process of shifting of the papers,

the company could not comply with the order. Learned counsel for the

Appellant states that the Appellant is ready and willing to deposit the

entire amount as per the impugned judgment and award.

3. It is to be noted that the Appellant had earlier filed the stay

application being Civil Application No.2827/2018 which was disposed

of by order dated 05/08/2019. The said order records the statement of

the learned counsel for the Appellant that in terms of the order dated

06/03/2019, the entire amount of compensation as per the judgment

had been deposited in the Tribunal. The said statement was accepted.

In the light of said statement, this Court had stayed the implementation

and execution of the impugned judgment and award pending hearing

of the Appeal. This Court had permitted the Respondent No.1/Original

Claimant No.1 to withdraw 20% of the compensation without

furnishing any security and had given directions to the Tribunal to

invest the balance amount in the fixed deposit in any nationalized

bank. The said Application was disposed of in above terms.

4. The statement made in the present Application that this Court

P.H. Jayani 16(b) 1327.2022.doc

had granted only ad-interim relief is factually incorrect. As noted

above, the order indicates that the learned counsel for the Appellant

had made a statement that the compensation was already deposited. It

is not the case of the Appellant that the said statement was incorrect.

Since the compensation is stated to have been deposited and stay order

was already granted, no further orders in the present Application.

5. Interim Application No.1327 of 2022 stands disposed of. PREETI H JAYANI Digitally signed by PREETI H JAYANI Date: 2022.03.11 19:22:13 +0530 (SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)