Siddharth Rajendra Bhate vs Smt. Amita Vinod Bhate And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 10845 Bom

                                                    40-ASIA-18124-2022 WITH ASFA-1027-2022.DOC




                      Ashwini



                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                  INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 18124 OF 2022
                                                           IN
                                        FIRST APPEAL NO. 1027 OF 2022


                      Siddharth Rajendra Bhate                                     ...Applicant
                           In the matter between
                      Siddharth Rajendra Bhate                                         Appellant
                           Versus
                      Amita Vinod Bhate & Ors                                    ...Respondents


                      Mr Anil Anturkar Senior Advocate,with Ranjit Shinde, for the
                           Appellant.
                      Mr Vineet Naik, Senior Advocate, with Amod Ekalspur, Ayaz
                           Bilawala, Yogesh Gaikwad, i/b Bilawala & Co, for Respondents
                           Nos. 1 & 2.


ASHWINI                                       CORAM          G.S. Patel &
HULGOJI
GAJAKOSH                                                     Gauri Godse, JJ.

Digitally signed by ASHWINI HULGOJI DATED: 17th October 2022 GAJAKOSH Date: 2022.10.18 09:57:35 +0530 PC:-

1. Mentioned out of turn.

2. The impugned judgment and decree was for Rs. 7,11,68,908.68/-. Mr Anturkar for the Appellant has nine instruments in favour of the Registrar in this amount. He states that this will be deposited in Court by Friday, 21st October 2022.

17th October 2022 40-ASIA-18124-2022 WITH ASFA-1027-2022.DOC

3. Mr Naik for the Respondents Plaintiffs seeks leave to withdraw the amount. Mr Anturkar has no objection. Consequently, the amount when deposited is not to be invested for a period of one month. If the withdrawal application is not made within one month, then the amount will be invested according to the usual practices of the office. The Respondents will then need to make a separate application to Court for withdrawal thereafter. If the amount is withdrawn by the Respondents, the decree is to be marked partly satisfied to that extent.

4. The remaining dispute is not only about an amount of Rs. 2 crores as compensation but about the rate of interest awarded or decreed on the principal amount of Rs. 7,11,68,908.68/-. Interest was decreed at 12% per annum. Mr Anturkar is willing to negotiate an amount with Mr Naik that would cover both a reduced rate of interest and a negotiated amount as compensation to bring a quietus to the entire dispute and have the entire decree mark satisfied.

5. In the meantime, in view of this the Respondents Plaintiffs will not proceed in execution of the remaining decree. We give both sides liberty to apply.

(Gauri Godse, J)                                      (G. S. Patel, J)





                            17th October 2022