The High Court at Madras dismissed an appeal filed to challenge a discretionary order directing the deposit of awarded funds in a fixed deposit. The court rejected the appellant's apprehension regarding the release of the amount as no such order existed.
The appeal and C.M.P.No.522 of 2017 were dismissed and closed.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.01.2017
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR
O.S.A.No.4 of 2017
Tata Projects Limited Mithona Towers-1, 1-7-80 to 87 Prender Ghast Road Secunderabad – 500 003. ... Appellant Vs. Shyam Construction Proprietor, G.Satish Kumar Kasthuri Flats 48A, Agathiyar Street Ambattur, Chennai. ... Respondent
PRAYER: Appeal under Order XXXVI Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules read with Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the fair and decreetal order dated 3.10.2016 made in A.No.5071 of 2016 in O.P.No.326 of 2016.
For Appellant : Mr.Krishna Ravindran JUDGMENT (Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
A discretionary order has been passed by the learned Judge calling into Court the amount awarded as per the award of Rs.9,42,517/- with interest at 9% per annum to be kept in a fixed deposit with a nationalized bank to earn interest.
In view of the aforesaid, the appeal is dismissed. Consequently, C.M.P.No.522 of 2017 is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CCC)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
sasi
To
The Sub Assistant Registrar,
Original Side,
High Court, Madras.
+1cc to Mr.G.Sathish Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No.3939
+1cc to Mr.Krishna Ravindran, Advocate, S.R.No.4058
O.S.A.No.4 of 2017
MG(CO)
CA(27/01/2017)
Tata Projects Limited
Shyam Construction
Sanjay Kishan Kaul
M. Sundar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
