Telangana High Court
M/S. Supra Marketing Agencies vs The Andhra Pradesh Backward ... on 28 November, 2022
Bench: Ujjal Bhuyan, C.V. Bhaskar Reddy
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1383 of 2022
ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)
Heard Mr. Rohan Aloor, learned counsel for the revision
petitioner and Mr. Md. Yousuf, learned Standing Counsel for
the 3rd respondent.
2. This civil revision petition has been filed under
Article 227 of the Constitution of India questioning the order
dated 18.04.2022 passed by the XIV Additional Chief Judge
(FTC), City Civil Court, Hyderabad in I.A.No.179 of 2022 in
O.P.No.1963 of 2002. Further prayer made for is to direct
XIV Additional Chief Judge (FTC), City Civil Court, Hyderabad
to allow the petitioner to withdraw Rs.29,35,387.00 along
with accrued interest.
3. XIV Additional Chief Judge (FTC), City Civil Court,
Hyderabad dismissed the petition of the petitioner in the
following manner:
2 HCJ & CVBRJ
C.R.P.No.1383 of 2022
"Perused the entire record. This petition is filed with
a prayer to recall the fixed deposit by enabling the
petitioner to withdraw an amount of Rs.29,35,387/-
along with accrued interest.
IN the accompanying affidavit the petitioner averred
that the Hon'ble High court while granting interim
suspension of judgment and decree dated 28-04-2011
directed the respondent to deposit 1/3rd of the awarded
amount and on such deposit the second respondent is
permitted to withdraw 50% of the said amount without
furnishing any security.
On perusal of the documents filed along with the
application found that the Hon'ble High court permitted
the petitioner herein to withdraw 50% of the amount
without furnishing security, accordingly A.P Backward
classes cooperative finance limited deposited an amount
of Rs.58,70,773/- vide Demand draft dated 14-11-2012
in to the credit of OP.1963/2002. The petitioner in his
affidavit deposited that the said Backward classes
cooperative finance ltd deposited an amount of
Rs.58,70,773/-. Thereafter he has withdrawn an amount
of Rs.29,35,386/- by way of filing a petition under rule
231 and 232 of Civil Rules of practice in the year 2012
itself i.e. 50% of the deposited amount.
It is evident from the affidavit of the petitioner, the
documents placed along with the affidavit and as per the
orders of Hon'ble High court the petitioner is entitled to
withdraw the 50% of the deposited amount only and the
said amount was already withdrawn by the petitioner in
the year 2012 itself. It is also evident from the record, the
appeal is still pending and there is no further orders in
3 HCJ & CVBRJ
C.R.P.No.1383 of 2022
respect of withdrawal of the balance 50% amount, which
are lying in the O.P account as per the endorsement of
Accounts section. Therefore the petitioner is not entitled
for relief. The petition is devoid of merits.
In the result, the petition is dismissed."
4. When the revision petition was moved, this Court
on 17.08.2022 had passed the following order:
"In I.A.No.179 of 2022 filed in O.P.No.1963 of 2002,
the XIV Additional Chief Judge (FTC), City Civil Court,
Hyderabad rejected the application to withdraw balance
50% of the amount already deposited by the respondents
on the ground that the order passed by this Court on
25.02.2022 in I.A.No.2 of 2012 in C.M.A.M.P.No.1434 of
2012 in CMA.No.820 of 2011, does not deal with
permission to withdraw the balance amount.
Prima-facie, we are of the opinion that the Court
below has erred in not understanding the scope of order
passed by this Court on 17.08.2012 and further orders
passed on 25.02.2022.
On 17.08.2012, this Court granted interim stay
subject to petitioner therein depositing 1/3rd of the
awarded amount, with liberty to the petitioner herein to
withdraw 50% of the said amount without furnishing any
security. By virtue of the order passed by this Court, on
25.02.2022, the said order stood vacated. Therefore,
there is no embargo on the petitioner seeking withdrawal
of the balance amount already deposited. Balance of
convenience is in favour of the petitioner herein.
4 HCJ & CVBRJ
C.R.P.No.1383 of 2022
Hence, there shall be interim direction as prayed
for."
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
following the order dated 17.08.2022, petitioner has applied
for withdrawal of balance 50% amount and the cheque
petition is pending before the XIV Additional Chief Judge
(FTC), City Civil Court, Hyderabad. To that extent, nothing
further survives for adjudication in the revision petition.
6. Learned counsel for the 3rd respondent is also in
agreement that insofar as the civil revision petition is
concerned, no further order is called for.
7. That being the position, XIV Additional Chief
Judge (FTC), City Civil Court, Hyderabad is directed to comply
with the order dated 17.08.2022 as extracted above without
any further delay.
8. Civil Revision Petition is accordingly disposed of.
However, there shall be no order as to costs.
5 HCJ & CVBRJ
C.R.P.No.1383 of 2022
9. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in this
Writ Petition shall stand closed.
__________________________
UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ
___________________________
C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J
Date: 28.11.2022
KL
