United India Insurance Co.Ltd. vs Naineshkumar Mahendrakumar ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 17025 Guj

    C/FA/2225/2021                              IA ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD


               CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2020
                    In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2225 of 2021
==========================================================

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.

Versus NAINESHKUMAR MAHENDRAKUMAR DARJI ========================================================== Appearance:

for the PETITIONER(s) No. MR ANAL S SHAH for the PETITIONER(s) No. RULE NOT RECD BACK for the RESPONDENT(s) No. RULE SERVED for the RESPONDENT(s) No. RULE UNSERVED for the RESPONDENT(s) No. SERVED BY AFFIX. (R) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.G.URAIZEE

Date : 28/10/2021 IA ORDER

1. Heard learned advocate for the applicant and learned advocate for respondent No.5. Though served, none appears on behalf of the claimants. So far as the service of respondent No.4 is concerned, there are two contradictory reports of the bailiffs. Report dated 11.10.2021 in respect of First Appeal No.2225 of 2021, reveals that when the bailiff visited the office of respondent No.4 on 8.10.2021, office clerk was found and he received copy of the First Appeal accordingly respondent No.4 is served. However, another report of the bailiff dated 4.10.2021, indicates that when the bailiff visited the office of respondent No.4 on 2.10.2021 to serve the process of present civil application, it was found that the respondent NO.4 has shifted his office to some other place. Two

C/FA/2225/2021 IA ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021

contradictory reports of the bailiff are really confusing and buffling. Be as it may, presence of other respondents is not necessary for the disposal of the application.

2. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the awarded amount of compensation along with interest and costs is deposited in the Tribunal in compliance of the order of this Court. He, therefore, submits that stay granted earlier may be confirmed.

3. Having heard the learned advocate for the applicant and having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, the stay granted earlier of the impugned judgment and awarded is confirmed till the final disposal of the appeal. Learned Tribunal is directed to invest entire awarded amount in cumulative FDR in any nationalized bank initially for a period of three years subject to further orders that may be passed by the Court. It is clarified that this order shall not preclude the claimants from preferring application for disbursement of the deposited amount which shall be considered in accordance with law.

4. With the aforesaid directions, present Civil Application stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute.

(A.G.URAIZEE, J) ALI