State of W.B. vs Adonis Engineers Coop. Construction Society Ltd.
- SCC(2022) 9 SCC 319
- Neutral2022 INSC 834
- SCR[2022] 7 SCR 557
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
In proceedings where a court has directed deposit of an entire decretal amount together with accrued interest as a condition to proceeding with a pending appeal, the Supreme Court may, in its discretion and in the facts and circumstances of the case, modify that direction and accept a lesser deposit amount as sufficient compliance to satisfy the ends of justice and permit the appeal to proceed on merits.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.5293 OF 2022 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.2366 of 2020)
STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. Appellants
VERSUS
ADONIS ENGINEERS CO-OPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION SOCIETY LIMITED Respondent
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal challenges the judgment and final order dated
23.07.2019 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of
Calcutta in CAN No.518 of 2018 in FAT No.500 of 2017.
3. The Order under appeal directed the present appellants to
deposit the entire decretal amount together with interest
awarded therein with the Registrar General of the High Court
within three weeks; and subject to such deposit, notice was
directed to be issued in the pending appeal.
4. By interim order dated 17.01.2020, the appellants were
directed to deposit a sum of Rs.45,00,000/- (Rupees Forty Five
Lakhs Only) with the Registrar General of the High Court
within three weeks from the date of Order. Accordingly, said Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Dr. Mukesh Nasa Date: 2022.08.23 19:53:59 IST Reason: sum has been deposited with the Registry of the High Court. 2
5. In the present appeal, we are concerned with the limited
question whether the direction to deposit the entire decretal
sum along with interest accrued thereon ought to be maintained
or whether the deposit of Rs.45,00,000/- (Rupees Forty-Five
Lakhs Only), as directed by this Court, can be taken to be
sufficient compliance of the direction issued by the High
Court.
6. We have heard Mr. Avishkar Singhvi, learned Advocate in
support of the appeal, and Mr. Pulkit Agarwal, learned
Advocate for the respondent.
7. In the facts and circumstances of the case on record, in
our view, deposit of Rs.45,00,000/- (Rupees Forty-Five Lakhs
Only) would meet the ends of justice. The direction to
deposit the entire decretal sum along with interest is,
therefore, substituted by direction to deposit Rs.45,00,000/-
(Rupees Forty-Five Lakhs Only). Since that part has already
been complied with, in our view, the pending appeal can now be
taken up for hearing on merits by the High Court.
8. We, therefore, request the High Court to take up pending
appeal being FAT No.500 of 2017 for disposal at an early date
and preferably within three months from today.
9. It is made clear that we have dealt with only one issue,
namely, the requirement of pre-deposit. All other issues are
left open to be agitated before the High Court. 3
10. The Civil Appeal is disposed of, with no order as to
costs.
............................J. (UDAY UMESH LALIT)
............................J. (S. RAVINDRA BHAT)
............................J. (SUDHANSHU DHULIA) New Delhi, August 16, 2022
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free