Allowed

Godawari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation through Its Executive Engineer v. M/S Pawar and Company (Engineers and Contractors)

Bombay HC10 Apr 2013CA/4467/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A civil applicant seeking refund of Rs.41 lakhs plus interest deposited as security after their appeal was allowed. The judge dismissed the respondent's objection on appeal timelines and ordered the refund.

What did the court decide?

Rs.41,00,000/- along with interest accrued thereon to be refunded to the applicant/appellant.

What the court decided

Godawari Marathwada Irrigation Development… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

ca4467.13

¶2

¶3

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

¶6

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4467 OF 2013 IN ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.06/2011.

¶7

Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corpn. v/s M/s Pawar and company.

¶8

Adv. for petitioners: Mr.B.R. Surwase. Adv. for respondents: Mr.J.N.Singh.

¶9

... CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J. Dated: April 10, 2013

¶10

Heard.

¶11

2 This application has been filed by the applicant - appellant for refund of the amount of Rs.41 lakhs along with interest accrued thereon in favour of the applicant.

¶12

3 It is stated in the application that after hearing both the sides, appeal preferred by the appellant has been allowed and the judgment and order of the District Judge has been set aside.

¶13

ca4467.13

¶14

¶15

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶16

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶17

¶18

The said amount was deposited in the Registry of this Court. The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that since appeal has been allowed, the amount of Rs.41 lakhs along with interest may be refunded to the appellant / applicant.

¶19

4 The learned Counsel for the respondent vehemently opposed the prayer of the applicant. He submits that till the appeal period is over, this Court may not allow the prayer in the application, and at least, for further two weeks, this Court may not pass any order.

¶20

5 I have given careful consideration to the submissions of the learned Counsel for the parties. Upon perusal of the contents of the application, it appears that this Court has allowed the appeal filed by the applicant - appellant. The Counsel for the applicant makes a statement that if there is any direction by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in future to deposit the amount, certainly the applicant - corporation will deposit the same. In that view of the matter and since the appeal

¶21

ca4467.13

¶22

¶23

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶24

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶25

¶26

has been allowed, there is no point in keeping the amount of Rs.41,00,000/- with interest accrued thereon with the Bank. Therefore, the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (B) and stands disposed of. The Registry to take necessary steps.

¶27

(S.S. SHINDE, J.)

¶28

PLK/*

Godawari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation through Its Executive Engineer v. M/S Pawar and Company (Engineers and Contractors)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Godawari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation through Its Executive Engineer v. M/S Pawar and Company (Engineers and Contractors)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sangita Suryakant Nale Vs Rajendra Murlidhar Zope

Social Centre, Ahmednagar Thru Secretary Vs the Commissioner, State Information Commission Aurangabad and Ors.

Masu Balayya and Ors. Vs Mah. State Board of Wakf Thru Chief Officer and Anr.

Mandabai Shivaji Khillari Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

M/S.S.D.Shinde Vs the Government of Mahaharashtra and Others

Shantabai Bhimrao Pawar and Others Vs Ramrao Namdev Kalbande