Gujarat High Court High Court

The vs Superintendent on 11 July, 2008

Gujarat High Court
The vs Superintendent on 11 July, 2008
Author: Jayant Patel,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/9174/2008	 3/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9174 of 2008
 

With


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9175 of 2008
 

 
 
=========================================================

 

THE
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COM LTD - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

SUPERINTENDENT
ENGINEER & 3 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
VIBHUTI NANAVATI for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
MR HRIDAY BUCH for Respondent(s) : 1, 
None
for Respondent(s) : 2 -
4. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 11/07/2008 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

In
both the petitions the challenge of the petitioner are against the
award passed by the tribunal on various contentions including that
the tribunal has committed an error in recording of the evidence,
the date fixed was different than the date on which the order was
pronounced etc.

Mr.

Nanavati learned Counsel for the petitioner states that as the
remedy of first appeal is available, the petitioner would resort to
such remedy. However, he submitted that the execution application is
filed, and the matter is kept today, and if the interim protection
is not granted, the petitioner may be required to deposit the
amount, and the tribunal may disburse the amount to the claimant.
Therefore, it was submitted that some reasonable time may be given
to the petitioner to enable him to prefer an appeal, and the
petitioner shall deposit the amount, but the withdrawal may not be
permitted for a period of one week.

Considering
the facts and circumstances, it appears that the proper remedy for
the petitioner is to prefer an appeal. With a view to see that
irreversible situation may not arise, the petitioner if desirous,
may prefer an appeal. If the execution proceedings are filed, the
tribunal shall be at the liberty to insist for deposit of the
amount, but the withdrawal shall not be permitted for a period of
one week from today. It is clarified that rights of the parties
shall be governed by the order, which may be passed ultimately by
this Court in the proceedings of first appeal. It is also clarified
that if the appeal is not preferred or appropriate orders are not
obtained within one week, the tribunal shall be at the liberty to
pass appropriate orders.

Disposed
of accordingly.

(JAYANT PATEL, J.)

Suresh*

   

Top