Full Text
Translation output
A-44 & 45
% 07.7.2011
Present: Mr.Ram Prakash, Advocate for the petitioner.
+CM No.12077/20 11 (for exemption) in CM (M)No.739/2011
CM No.12078/2011 (for exemption) in CM(M)No.740/2011
*
Allowed subject to just exceptions.
CM (M)No.739/2011& CM(M)No.740/2011
Impugned order before this Court is the order dated
28.5.2011. By this order the prayer made by the petitioner for release of the amount deposited by the respondent had been rejected; court had noted that in terms of the order of the High
Court dated 06.8.2009 the amount deposited by the respondent at the rate of Rs.30,000/- per month was to be kept in an FDR during the pendency of the suit. Keeping this direction of the High Court in mind the prayer made by the applicant has been rejected. Order dated 30.10.2009 had been passed by the High Court on an application made by the respondent seeking extension of time for the deposit of the said amount; that application has been rejected.
It is not in dispute that thereafter the respondent had approached the Apex Court; the Apex Court vide its order dated 14.12.2009 had granted two weeks extension to the respondent to comply with the order of the High Court dated 06.8.2009. Petitioner n
2011:DHC:18915 has vehemently contended that the Apex Court had added a rider that the extension of time granted is without prejudice to the rights of either party.
All these contentions had been considered in the impugned order. The order dated 06.8.2009 has clearly stipulated that during the pendency of the suit the amount paid by the respondent shall be kept in FDR; they were rightly not released to the petitioner. There is no infirmity in the impugned order; it does not call for any interference.
Dismissed.
INDERMEET KAUR, J.
JULY 07, 2011 nandan
2011:DHC:18915
% 07.7.2011
Present: Mr.Ram Prakash, Advocate for the petitioner.
+CM No.12077/20 11 (for exemption) in CM (M)No.739/2011
CM No.12078/2011 (for exemption) in CM(M)No.740/2011
*
Allowed subject to just exceptions.
CM (M)No.739/2011& CM(M)No.740/2011
Impugned order before this Court is the order dated
28.5.2011. By this order the prayer made by the petitioner for release of the amount deposited by the respondent had been rejected; court had noted that in terms of the order of the High
Court dated 06.8.2009 the amount deposited by the respondent at the rate of Rs.30,000/- per month was to be kept in an FDR during the pendency of the suit. Keeping this direction of the High Court in mind the prayer made by the applicant has been rejected. Order dated 30.10.2009 had been passed by the High Court on an application made by the respondent seeking extension of time for the deposit of the said amount; that application has been rejected.
It is not in dispute that thereafter the respondent had approached the Apex Court; the Apex Court vide its order dated 14.12.2009 had granted two weeks extension to the respondent to comply with the order of the High Court dated 06.8.2009. Petitioner n
2011:DHC:18915 has vehemently contended that the Apex Court had added a rider that the extension of time granted is without prejudice to the rights of either party.
All these contentions had been considered in the impugned order. The order dated 06.8.2009 has clearly stipulated that during the pendency of the suit the amount paid by the respondent shall be kept in FDR; they were rightly not released to the petitioner. There is no infirmity in the impugned order; it does not call for any interference.
Dismissed.
INDERMEET KAUR, J.
JULY 07, 2011 nandan
2011:DHC:18915
JUDGMENT