Bombay High Court
Future Generali India Life Insurance ... vs Partha Sarathy S/O. Mr. Prakritiranjan ... on 19 August, 2024
Author: Nitin W. Sambre
Bench: Nitin W. Sambre
26-WP-4804-2024.odt 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO.4804 of 2024
Futrue Generali India Life Insurance Company Ltd. Through its authorized signatory-Mr.
Neeraj Murgai
vs.
Mr. Partha Sarathy s/o Mr. Prakritiranjan Sarkar
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order
Coram, appearances, Court's Orders
or directions and Registrar's order
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. D. V. Chauhan, Senior Advocate a/b Mr. N.R. Jadhav, Advocate for petitioner.
CORAM :- NITIN W. SAMBRE AND ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.
DATE :- 19th AUGUST, 2024
We heard Mr. Chauhan, learned Senior Advocate for the
petitioner-original defendant/ judgment debtor.
2. Prayer in the petition is for directions to decide the prayer made
in the application under Order 41 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil
Procedure moved by the petitioner in Regular Civil Appeal No.206 of
2023(Exhibit 6) expeditiously. Further prayer of stay of execution is
also sought.
3. Mr. Chauhan, learned Senior Advocate for the
petitioner/original defendant would invite our attention to the
judgment and decree dated 17.07.2023 passed in Special Civil Suit
No.69/2012. According to him, the decree is already under execution
before the Civil Judge, Senior Division.
4. According to Mr. Chauhan, the petitioner has preferred Regular
Civil Appeal being R.C.A.No.206 of 2023 before the learned District
Judge in which an application under Order 41 Rule 5 of the Code of
Civil Procedure for grant of stay to the execution of decree came to be
moved. According to him, the said application has not been heard till
this date and the petitioner is required to face execution proceedings
though categorical statement is made by the petitioner that the
principal amount of claim shall be deposited before the appellate
Court.
5. Mr. Chauhan would invite our attention to the copy of e-mail
sent to the respondent thereby claiming that the notice of hearing of
the present writ petition is already issued to the respondent-decree
holder.
6. In this background, we deem it appropriate to cause notice to
the respondent, returnable on 02.09.2024.
7. In response to the Court's query, it is informed as against
decreetal amount i.e. principal amount of Rs.One Crore with interest
@12% per annum, Rs. Four Crores can be deposited within eight
weeks. Mr. Chauhan, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the
petitioner, on instructions from the authorized representative of the
petitioner Mr. Neeraj s/o Kamal Murgai, states that the amount of
Rs. Four Crores shall be deposited in this Court within a period of eight
weeks from today and the first installment of Rs.Two Crores shall be
deposited on or before the next date.
8. The aforesaid statement is accepted as an undertaking to this
Court.
9. In view of aforesaid statement in the form of undertaking, we
deem it appropriate to direct the Executing Court not to proceed with
the matter.
10. We make it clear that the appellate Court is not precluded from
deciding the application preferred by the petitioner under Order 41
Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure in which hearing is informed to
have been concluded.
(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.)
Signed by: Jayant S. Andurkar Andurkar.
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 19/08/2024 15:56:40
