Disposed

The Chairman Cum M.D. Western Coalfields Ltd. v. Uma Shankar Sinha and Ors.

Bombay HC31 Jan 2013CAW/2103/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge observation in a civil application concerning a petition challenging gratuity claims. The court dispensed with strict compliance with prior restraint orders and directed the respondent to deposit an additional sum as a condition for the petition being disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Respondent directed to deposit Rs. 7,50,000/- in fixed deposit and submit security for Rs. 11,00,000/-.

The Chairman Cum M.D. Western Coalfields Ltd. Vs Uma… — Banking and Recovery | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

caw2103-12.order

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

¶3

Civil Application W No. 2103 of 2012 in

¶4

Writ Petition No. 662 of 2012

¶5

The Chairman Cum Managing Director, Western Coalfields Ltd., Coal Estate, Civil Lines, Nagpur.

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Uma Shankar Sinha and others.

¶8

Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

¶9

Court's or Judge's Orders.

¶10

Mr. Ramesh Darda, counsel for petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Ansari, counsel for respondent no.1.

¶12

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : 31st January, 2013.

¶13

The counsel for the respondent no.1 has presented a pursis in the court today. The same is accepted on record. By the pursis, the respondent no.1 prays for suitable time for complying with the order. The respondent no. 1 further states that he is ready to comply the orders, which ever may be passed by this court.

¶14

It appears that this court had while issuing notice in Writ Petition No. 82/2012 restrained the respondent no. 1 from withdrawing the amount deposited by the petitioner before the appellate authority till the returnable date. It appears that the respondent no.1 has, however, withdrawn the amount on 20.3.2012. Though it is the case of the petitioner that the clerk of the petitioner had telephonically informed the respondent no.1 that he was restrained from withdrawing the amount, this fact is disputed by the respondent no.1. At least the court record shows that the respondent no.1 was not served till 20.3.2012 when the respondent no.1 withdrew the amount, or a couple of

¶15

caw2103-12.order

¶16

months thereafter. It, therefore, does not prima facie appear that the respondent no.1 has deliberately withdrawn the amount in spite of the knowledge of the order dated 8.2.2012. Apart from the aforesaid position, the learned counsel for the respondent no.1 has from day one fairly stated that the respondent no.1 is ready to comply with whichever directions this court may issue.

¶17

It is the case of the petitioner, in the instant petition, that the respondent no.1 is not entitled to any amount which is deposited by the petitioner before the appellate authority. The alternate submission of the petitioner is that the respondent no.1 would not be entitled to gratuity over and above the amount of Rs.10,00,000/-. If that be so, in the interest of justice, the respondent no.1 is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.7,50,000/- in this court within a period of four weeks. The respondent no.1 should also submit solvent surety/security for an amount of Rs.11,00,000/- to the satisfaction of the Additional Registrar. The amount of Rs.7,50,000/-, if deposited by the respondent no.1 in this court, should be placed in a Fixed Deposit Account of a nationalized bank initially for a period of one year and the same should be renewed thereafter from time to time. The application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶18

JUDGE

¶19

Hirekhan

The Chairman Cum M.D. Western Coalfields Ltd. v. Uma Shankar Sinha and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Chairman Cum M.D. Western Coalfields Ltd. v. Uma Shankar Sinha and Ors.

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

Smt. Kalpana W/O Moreshrao Charde and Another Vs Suman W/O Gowindrao Jolhe and Another

Sadashiv S/O Vamanrao Karvate Vs Chandraabhaga @ Chandraprabha Ramchandra Karvate and Anr.

Ku. Vaishali Suresh Devkar Vs State of Maharashtra through Law and Judiciary Department and Others

Mohmmad Ashraf Haji Noor Mohammad and Anr. Vs Divisional Manager (T.M. Retail) Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltdand Anr.

Amravati Municipal Corporation, Thr. Its Commissioner and Another Vs Shri. Mukund S/O Digamber Khajindar

Mr. Kadir Ajim Sheikh Vs Mr. Ashok Harichandraji Satpute and Ors.