IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 8 OF 2011 THE STATE OF GOA,THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY AND ORS., ... Petitioners Versus SMT. RITA PEREIRA (SINCE DEC.) THROUGH LR'S I(A) SHRI YESHWANT PEREIRA ... Respondent Mr. Shaikh Vahidullah, Government Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. D. Pangam, Advocate for respondent no.1. Coram:- F. M. REIS, J. Date:- 7th October, 2011 P.C. Heard Shri S. Vahidulla, learned Government Advocate for the petitioners and Shri D. Pangam, learned Counsel appearing for respondent no.1. 2. The above petition challenges the order passed by the learned District Judge directing the petitioners to furnish the calculations and also holds that the respondents are entitled for the interest on solatium as granted by the award passed in the Land Acquisition Case No.79/87. 3. At the hearing of the above petition, Shri S. Vahidulla, learned Government Advocate appearing for the petitioners did not dispute the fact that the respondents were in fact granted interest on solatium by the award passed in Land Acquisition Case No.79/87. The learned counsel however points out that the petitioners had deposited the amount for the purpose of obtaining a stay of the said award before this Court and as such according to him no further amounts are to be paid to the respondents. 4. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties and on perusal of the records, it is not in dispute that there was no satisfaction to any decree recorded before the Executing Court in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code nor any evidence by the respondents that they had received the amount in full and final satisfaction of the amount awarded. Apart from that, merely depositing an amount before this Court for the purpose of obtaining a stay does not discharge the payment of the amount payable in accordance with the award passed in the Land Acquisition Case no.79/87. The learned Judge was justified to direct the petitioners to furnish the calculations and pay the amount in accordance with the award passed in the Land Acquisition Case No.79/87 after deducting any amount which has been received by the respondents. As such, I find no jurisdictional error committed by the learned Judge whilst passing the impugned order. Hence, there is no merit in the above petition and consequently the petition stands summarily dismissed. F. M. REIS, J. at*