1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR C.A. NO. 3759/2008 IN First Appeal No. 87/1992 (D) (The State of Maharashtra & another VERSUS Umashankar Pokarmal Khetan (Dead), thr. L.Rs.) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri A.S. Sonare, A.G.P. for the applicants. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : OCTOBER 16, 2009. Though First Appeal No.87/1992 is decided by the judgment dated 03.08.2009, the learned Assistant Government Pleader has moved this Court for taking the decided first appeal on board. It is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned Assistant Government Pleader that the appellant State has deposited the entire decretal amount of Rs. 3,49,040/- in the trial Court as per the award passed by the reference Court. The non-applicant/claimant had withdrawn that amount from the reference Court on furnishing security. During the pendency of the first appeal before this Court, the respondent-claimant had filed an application under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure claiming additional amount of Rupees Seven Lacs and odd. Curiously enough, 2 according to the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the reference Court had allowed that application also. Since at the relevant time, the first appeal was pending, in stead of filing another proceedings, the State Government filed Civil Application No.3759/2008 in First Appeal No.87/1992. This application was considered by this Court and interim relief in terms of prayer clause (iii) of the application was granted. Now, after dismissal of the first appeal, the respondent is again trying to execute the order passed by the reference Court on the amendment application. All these aspects were not brought to the notice of this Court while deciding the first appeal. According to the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the application under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure was not tenable after the award was passed by the reference Court. The learned Assistant Government Pleader, therefore, seeks six weeks time for filing appropriate proceedings to challenge the order passed by the reference Court on the application under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It would be necessary to stay the order passed by the reference Court on the application under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure for a period of six weeks from today to enable the State Government to file appropriate 3 proceedings. The order dated 14.01.2005 as also the order dated 14.01.2006 issuing warrant against the appellant State is stayed for a period of six weeks from today. Liberty to file appropriate proceedings is granted. JUDGE APTE