Disposed

La Collector , Hooghly v. Sujit Kumar Manna

Calcutta HC6 Oct 2023FA/7/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order directs the appellant to deposit a specific sum as the balance award from an acquisition judgment, with instructions that the amount be invested in a fixed deposit scheme pending the final hearing of the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Appellant directed to deposit Rs.6,08,056/- with Registrar General; amount to be invested in Fixed Deposit pending final appeal decision.

La Collector , Hooghly Vs Sujit Kumar Manna — Calcutta HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

193 06.10.23

¶2

F.A. 7 of 2020 CAN 6 of 2023

¶3

Ct. No. 04

¶4

akd

¶5

L. A. Collector, Hooghly Vs. Sujit Kumar Manna

¶6

Mr. Soumitra Bandyopadhyay, Mr. Priyabrata Batabyal. … for the appellant. Mr. Sukumar Bhattacharyya, Ms. Piyali Shaw, Ms. Oindrila Chatterjee, Ms. Puja Sarkar.. … for the respondent/applicant.

¶7

Re: CAN 6 of 2023

¶8

The instant appeal is filed by the State assailing the judgement and order dated 27^th March, 2015 passed by the L.A. Court in L.A. Misc. Case No. 59 of 2010.

¶9

The instant application is taken out by the respondent seeking an order directing the L.A. Collector, Hooghly to deposit the balance amount in terms of the impugned judgement and order with this Court.

¶10

Obviously the moment the L.A. Court has determined the value of the property at the time of acquisition, it partakes the character of money decree. It further appears that the Execution Case is stayed on condition of the deposit of an amount. The Record further reveals that a sum of Rs.26,24,352/- had been deposited with the Registrar General.

¶11

In the instant application the respondent contends that the aforesaid amount deposited by the appellant is not in tune with the impugned judgement and order and, therefore, the appellant should pay the rest of the amount.

¶12

¶13

The detailed calculation has been depicted in paragraph 14 of the instant application wherein it is indicated that a sum of Rs.6,08,056/- is required to be further deposited by the appellant. Though the appellant disputes the calculation as depicted therein, but we feel that the same shall be decided at the time of final hearing of the instant appeal.

¶14

There is no difficulty in depositing the aforesaid amount by the appellant in compliance with the order of the Division Bench and, therefore, the instant application is disposed of directing the State/appellant to deposit Rs.6,08,056/- with the Registrar General of this Court within one week after reopening of this Court following long vacation.

¶15

It is further made clear that the aforesaid amount shall not be disbursed to the respondent, but shall be invested in an interest bearing Fixed Deposit scheme by the Registrar General in any nationalized bank and shall continue to renew the same until further order passed in the instant appeal.

¶16

With the above observations, the application being CAN 6 of 2023 is disposed of.

¶17

Since the appeal is otherwise ready for hearing, the same shall be listed three weeks after reopening of this Court following long vacation.

¶18

(Prasenjit Biswas, J.)

¶19

La Collector , Hooghly v. Sujit Kumar Manna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

La Collector , Hooghly v. Sujit Kumar Manna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Soma Jana @ Payra Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Arijit Mullick Vs State of West Bengal & Anr.

Sunita Gurung Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Sourav Kumar Mukherjee Vs MD Danish Farooqui and Ors.

Ashok Kumar Sinha Vs MD Khurshid Alam and Anr.

M/S India Power Corporation Ltd. Vs Sbicap Trustee Company Ltd. and Ors.