This single paragraph order clarifies an earlier decree regarding the amount to be deposited by applicants for interim protection. The court corrected an inadvertent error, directing a total deposit of Rs. 30 Lakhs instead of Rs. 70 Lakhs as per Para 14(2).
The application is disposed of; applicants are directed to deposit a total of Rs. 30 Lakhs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CONTD. ORDER.SHEET
PAGE No
CASE No...
| DATE | DESCRIPTIONOFTHE OROER | REMARK |
|---|---|---|
| sA12t24 05/02/24 |
Appticantsby ShriUditMaindiretta,Advocate RespBankbyShriAdamyaBajpai,Advocate |
|
| Matteristakenupforhearingon lA712124 appticationforctarification of orderdated23l01/24. Boththecounselheard.Orderperused. Afterperusaloforder daledT3/01/24itappearsthat in fact thisbenchhasdirectedtodepositRs.30Lac infourinstattment as reftected under14(2)ofthe order.However,inadvertentlyunder Para 14(1)Rs. 70lachasbeenmentioned.l,thereforectearthatthe appticantsareobtigedtodepositintotal30Lacfor enjoyingtheinterimprotection grantedbyorder dated23101/24andtheyhavetofollowfor depositingtheamountthedirectiongiven underpara 14(2)ottheorder.Restoftheconditions shatl beas eartier. Accordingty appIicationstandsdisposedof. (Ra was Patet) Presidingofficer CounsetforAppticantsinviting attentionatpara-6of theorderapprisethatagainstthetotaloutstanding Rs.1.22crore therewas noreasontoordertodeposit Rs.70lacaspertraditionadoptedby thisTribunal andpraysforctarifywhethertheAppticantsare obtigedtofottowtheamountasmentioned under the Para-14orasperinstallmentsdirectedtobe depositedasperpara-14(2)whichintotalreflectsRs. 30 Lac. |
Applicants
Respondent Bank
RA.Jain
Presiding Officer
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
