Bombay High Court
M/S. Oriental Fire And General ... vs M/S. Haldyn Glass Works Private Lmited ... on 15 January, 2024
Digitally signed
by LAXMIKANT
2024:BHC-OS:828-DB
LAXMIKANT GOPAL
GOPAL CHANDAN
CHANDAN Date:
2024.01.16 1 (NOB) APP-122.16.doc
18:04:10 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
APPEAL NO.122 OF 2016
IN
SUIT NO.2716 OF 1986
M/s. Oriental Fire & General Insurance
Co. Ltd. : Appellant.
Vs.
M/s. Haldyn Glass Works Private Ltd.
and ors. : Respondents.
-----
None for the Appellant.
Mr. Zubin Behramkamdin, Senior Advocate a/w Ms. Sneha
Jaisingh and Ms. Tanya Chaudhary i/by Bharucha and Partners
for Respondent No.1.
-----
CORAM : DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ. &
ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.
DATE : 15th JANUARY, 2024
P.C. :
1 Not on board. Mentioned. Taken on board.
2 Mr. Behramkamdin, learned Senior Counsel appearing
on behalf of Respondent No.1, pointed out that this Court by an
order dated 30th October 2023 disposed of the captioned Appeal.
He submitted that the Appeal was against the judgment of this
LGC 1 of 4
2 (NOB) APP-122.16.doc
Court dated 16th April 2014 by which the captioned Suit was
decreed in the following terms viz. :-
"(a) Respondent No.1 is entitled to a decree in the
sum of Rs.1,83,51,397/- against the Appellant
and interest thereon at the rate of 6% p.a. from
the date of the filing of the Suit till the date of
the decree and further interest at the rate of
12% p.a. on the principal amount of
Rs.1,83,51,397/- from the date of the decree till
payment of realization.
(b) Respondent No.1 is entitled to a decree as to
costs as against the Appellant (a) in the amount
of Rs.32,12,324/-, if allowable; or (b) in
accordance with the extant rules of costs and
taxation; together with interest thereon at the
rate of 8% p.a. from the date of the decree till
payment or realization."
3. Mr. Behramkamdin pointed out that this Court
disposed of the Appeal by only setting aside (b) above i.e. the
grant of actual costs and upheld the decree. He pointed out that
the Appellant had on 31st October 2014 infact deposited the
LGC 2 of 4
3 (NOB) APP-122.16.doc
entire decretal amount of Rs.5,39,27,879/-, basis which
execution proceedings were stayed.
4. Mr. Behramkamdin submitted that since the decree
was upheld, Respondent No.1 was entitled to withdraw the
amount deposited by the Appellant in this Court. He submitted
that the office was however not releasing the said amount since
there was no direction to that effect in the order dated 30 th
October 2023. It is thus that he sought a direction from this
Court that Respondent No.1 be permitted to withdraw the said
amount.
5. We have heard learned Senior Counsel appearing on
behalf of Respondent No.1.
6. Given the fact that the decree pursuant to which the
deposit was made has been upheld, we find no reason as to why
Respondent No.1 should not be permitted to withdraw the
decretal amount. Office is therefore directed to release the
LGC 3 of 4
4 (NOB) APP-122.16.doc
decretal amount in favour of Respondent No.1 from the amount
so deposited after ensuring proper computation of the same.
7. Learned counsel for Respondent No.1 shall also give
intimation/notice to the Appellant when making an application
for release of the decretal amount to Respondent No.1.
8. Praecipe is accordingly disposed of.
(ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE)
LGC 4 of 4
