Partly allowed

Mr. Rajendra P. Bansal v. Reliance Communication Ltd.

Bombay HC18 Feb 2013CAF/405/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this execution proceeding, the applicant sought partial withdrawal of a deposited decretal amount and changes to the deposit mode. The court partly allowed the application, permitting partial withdrawal with/without security and directing the balance investment in a fixed deposit. The application was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Applicant allowed to withdraw Rs. 5 lakhs without security and Rs. 10 lakhs by furnishing security; balance to be invested in fixed deposit.

Mr. Rajendra P. Bansal Vs Reliance Communication Ltd. — Execution and Attachment | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

1 caf405.13

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.405 OF 2013 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.1539 OF 2012

¶5

Rajendra P.Bansal .. Applicant. Vs. Reliance Communications Ltd. .. Respondent.

¶6

Mr.Rajendra Bansal, applicant present in person. Mr.Yahya Ghogari i/b Dave & Co. for the respondent.

¶7

CORAM : NARESH.H.PATIL & N.M. JAMDAR, JJ.

¶8

DATED : 18TH FEBRUARY, 2013

¶9

P.C.

¶10

Heard applicant in person and learned counsel for the respondent.

¶11

The applicant, party in person submits that entire decretal amount is not deposited by the judgment debtor in the trial Court, therefore, ad-interim order passed by this court shall be vacated. He further submitted that amount deposited by the judgment debtor be allowed to be withdrawn. The applicant has referred to appointment order, termination order and other relevant documents which are placed on record.

¶12

Learned counsel appearing for respondent-original appellant submits that consequent to the order passed by this court the decretal amount has been deposited in the trial Court. By an order

¶13

2 caf405.13

¶14

passed on 29th January, 2013 the trial Court directed Nazir to deposit an amount of Rs.32,16,909/- in Nationalized bank as fixed deposit. The applicant requested the trial Court to deposit the amount in a Nationalised bank. Counsel further submits that substantial issues are raised in respect of claim raised by the applicant. Counsel for the respondent opposed the application for withdrawal of amount by the applicant.

¶15

We have noticed the record placed before us, considered submissions advanced. The original appellant is challenging money decree. Considering relevant documents and submissions advanced we are inclined to allow the applicant to withdraw part of amount out of the deposited amount. Application is partly allowed in following terms :-

¶16

(a) The applicant shall be entitled to withdraw an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs) without furnishing any security.

¶17

(b) The applicant shall be further allowed to withdraw Rs.10,00,000-/ (Rupees Ten Lakhs) on furnishing security to satisfaction of the Executing court.

¶18

(c) The Executing Court to invest the remaining amount in a fixed deposit scheme of any Nationalised bank with renewal clause.

¶19

(d) Application is disposed of.

¶20

(N.M.JAMDAR, J.) (NARESH.H.PATIL, J.)

Mr. Rajendra P. Bansal v. Reliance Communication Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Rajendra P. Bansal v. Reliance Communication Ltd.

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

The State of Maharashtra Vs Prabhakar Pandharinath Dhere

Reliance Communication Ltd. Vs Mr. Rajendra P. Bansal

The State of Maharashtra Vs Prabhakar Pandharinath Dhere