Dismissed

N.D.M.C. v. Mohd. Usman & Ors.

Delhi HC19 Sept 2016RFA/302/2001

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The appeal by N.D.M.C. was disposed of as not pressed. The court directed that the deposited sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- with interest be released to the respondents-decree holders subject to furnishing a detailed authenticated attorney on record.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed of as not pressed; sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- with interest to be released to respondents upon filing of authenticated attorney.

N.D.M.C. Vs Mohd. Usman & Ors. — Delhi HC (2016) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~R-10

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- RFA 302/2001 & C.M.No. 916/2001

¶4

N.D.M.C. ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Malvika Trivedi, Additional Standing Counsel for N.D.M.C. & Mr. Jitendera Kumar Tripathi, Advocate

¶5

Versus

¶6

MOHD. USMAN & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Shashi Saxena, Advocate

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

¶8

¶9

O R D E R 19.09.2016

¶10

The decree of 27^th April, 2001, awarding a sum of 5,00,000/with interest and costs in favour of respondents, is challenged by appellant in this appeal. While entertaining this appeal, operation of the impugned judgment/ decree of 27<sup>th</sup> April, 2001, was stayed subject to appellant depositing 3,50,000/- with the Registrar General of this Court. Vide order of 16^th April, 2002, the amount deposited by the appellant was directed to be released in favour of respondents subject to furnishing of security.

¶11

Learned counsel for respondents submits that security could not be furnished and so, the amount of `3,50,000/- is still lying deposited with the Registrar General of this Court in the form of fixed deposit receipt.

¶12

RFA 302/2001

¶13

Page 1

¶14

Today, Ms. Malvika Trivedi, Additional Standing Counsel for appellant- N.D.M.C., has placed on record copy of office notings to show that this appeal is not being pressed with concurrence of the respondents, who have agreed to accept the deposited amount with interest as full and final settlement.

¶15

Learned counsel for respondents submits that respondents would be satisfied if the amount of `3,50,000/- with interest accrued thereupon is released to them.

¶16

In view of the stand taken as above, this appeal is disposed of as not pressed with direction that the amount of `3,50,000/- lying deposited in the form of fixed deposit receipt with the Registrar General of this Court with interest accrued thereupon be released to the respondentsdecree holders (through legal heirs or their attorney) as per rules, provided a detailed authenticated attorney is placed on record.

¶17

The appeal and the application are accordingly disposed of.

¶18

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE

¶19

SEPTEMBER 19, 2016 r

¶20

RFA 302/2001

¶21

Page 2

N.D.M.C. v. Mohd. Usman & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.D.M.C. v. Mohd. Usman & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.R.Engineering Construction Vs Union of India & Ors.

Mr. Paul (Richard) Berkowitz Vs Mr. Rajib Saha & Anr.

Sh. Rishi Pratap Singh Vs Dr. Chander Kanta Khan & Others

Shilpa Tandon Vs Harish Chand Tandon & Anr.

Mahavir Prasad Gupta Vs M/S Anesh Steel Crafts & Ors.

Shri Vimal Jetha Vs M/S Praveer Constructions Pvt. Ltd.