Gujarat High Court
Baroda District Cooperative Milk ... vs Satishchandra Sood on 16 November, 2021
Bench: A.G.Uraizee
C/FA/5176/2019 IA ORDER DATED: 16/11/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR WITHDRAWAL/DISBURSEMENT OF AMOUNT)
NO. 2 of 2021
In
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5176 of 2019
================================================================
SATISHCHANDRA SOOD
Versus
BARODA DISTRICT COOPERATIVE MILK PRODUCING UNION LIMITED
==============================================================================
Appearance:
MR AB MUNSHI for the PETITIONER(s) No.
MR VC VAGHELA for the RESPONDENT(s) No.
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.G.URAIZEE
Date : 16/11/2021
IA ORDER
1. Heard Mr. R.R. Marshal, learned senior advocate
assisted by Mr. A.B. Munshi, learned advocate for the
applicant and Mr. V.C. Vaghela, learned advocate for the
respondents.
2. Respondents have preferred First Appeal No.5176/2019
to assail the judgment and decree dated 17.12.2018 passed
by 16th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vadodara in Special
Civil Suit No.11/2000. The applicant, the original plaintiff
were as the respondents are the original defendants.
3. By order dated 25.02.2020 the appeal preferred by the
respondents is admitted and the impugned judgment and
decree is stayed vide even dated order passed on Civil
Application No.1/2019 on condition of depositing the entire
decreetal amount before this Court with liberty in favour of
the applicant to file appropriate application for disbursement
of the amount post deposit of the amount by the
respondents.
4. The respondents have deposited entire decreetal amount
along with interest in this Court in compliance of the order.
C/FA/5176/2019 IA ORDER DATED: 16/11/2021
The applicant has, therefore, preferred present application
for disbursement of amount which is deposited by the
respondents.
5. Mr. Marshal, learned senior advocate submits that the
applicant who is aged around 76 years is waiting for the
fruit of his suit since long. It is his submission that at least
50% of the deposited amount may be released in favour of
the applicant and remaining 50% may be invested in
cumulative fixed deposit till disposal of the appeal preferred
by the respondents.
6. Mr. Vaghela, learned advocate for the respondents has
vehemently opposed this application. He submits that
initially contract for pouch packing and repairing of machine
was given to the applicant for a period of one year from
13.10.1996 to 15.10.1997 and thereafter it was renewed from
16.10.1997 to 31.03.1998 and from 1.4.1998 to 13.09.1999.
He submits that the contract was thereafter continued for
one more month up to 30.04.1999. He, submits that the
applicant has raised the subject bills after the termination of
the contracts. It is his submission that the applicant never
raised the subject bill during the subsists of contract. He
submits that all the bills raised by the applicant during the
subsists of contract have been paid to him and the subject
bills are after though as a result of termination of the
contract. He submits that the respondents have raised very
strong legal issues in the appeal and there are very strong
chances that the respondents will succeed in the appeal. He,
therefore, urges that the amount may not be disbursed in
favour of the applicant. In the alternative, he submits that
20% of the deposit amount may be disbursed in favour of
the applicant.
C/FA/5176/2019 IA ORDER DATED: 16/11/2021
7. Mr. Marshal, learned senior advocate in the rejoinder
submits that 20% amount may be disbursed in favour of the
applicant unconditionally and 30% may be disbursed on
condition of furnishing solvent security to the satisfaction of
the Registrar, Recruitment & Finance, High Court of Gujarat.
8. I have considered the rival submissions. It is not in
dispute that the contract for pouch packing operation and
maintenance was given by the respondent to the applicant
initially for a period of one year from 13.10.1996 which
came to be extended from time to time till 30.04.1999. It
appears that the bone contention between the applicant and
respondents is the subject bills which were raised by the
applicant for the work done by him post of cessation of the
contract. Under the circumstances, in my considered view it
would be opposite to release 20% amount in favor of the
applicant and 30% of the deposited amount is released on
furnishing solvent surety.
9. For the foregoing reasons, the present application is
allowed. The Registry is directed to release 20% of the
deposited amount in favour of the applicant unconditionally
and 30% of the deposited amount be released on furnishing
solvent security to the satisfaction of the Registrar,
Recruitment & Finance, High Court of Gujarat. The
remaining 50% amount is ordered to be invested in
cumulative fixed deposit till disposal of the appeal.
10. The present application stands disposed of.
(A.G.URAIZEE, J)
Manoj
