High Court Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Lr Balveer Singh & Ors vs Smt. Savitri Devi & Ors on 2 February, 2010

Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Lr Balveer Singh & Ors vs Smt. Savitri Devi & Ors on 2 February, 2010
                S.B.CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO. 495/2003
             L.Rs of Balveer Singh vs. Smt. Savitri Devi & Ors.
                       DATE OF ORDER : 2/2/2010

               HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI


Mr.Sajjan Singh, for the appellant.
Mr.C.R.Jakhar, for the respondent.

       This appeal is directed against the order dated 23/3/2003 passed by
the learned court below while deciding application under Order 39 Rule 1
and 2 CPC. The court below in respect of land acquired has held that 1/10th
amount of the compensation shall not be received by the non-applicant,
present appellants before this Court and said amount of 1/10 of the
compensation amount of Rs.97,591/- shall remain deposited in the
Nationalized Bank in fixed deposit.
       Learned counsel for the appellant defendants submits that said
amount may be permitted to be disbursed to the defendants as there was a
release deed in favour of defendants and subject to their furnishing the
solvent security, the learned court below may be requested to decide the
suit expeditiously.
       Though this request was opposed by the learned counsel for the
respondent-plaintiff, he submitted that the money in question may be kept in
fixed deposit of the bank as directed by the learned court below.
       Having heard the learned counsels, this Court is of the opinion that
interest of justice would be met if the impugned order dated 22/3/2003
passed by the court below is modified to the extent that the said 1/10th
amount of the compensation lying in fixed deposit of the bank may be
disbursed to the appellant defendants subject to their furnishing solvent
security to the satisfaction of learned trial court that in case the suit is
decreed and it is held against them that they are not entitled to the land in
question, they will refund the said amount with @ 9% simple interest.
       Consequently, this appeal is partly allowed and the impugned order
dated 22/3/2003 is modified in aforesaid terms. No order as to costs.


                                             (DR.VINEET KOTHARI), J.

item no.25
baweja/-