1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION rpa NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 263 OF 2010 IN SUIT NO. 296 OF 2010 Shantabai K. Vardhan & Ors. .. Plaintiffs v/s. Meera G. Patel & Anr. .. Defendants. .... Mr. Sanjay Kothari i/b. Vigil Juris for the Plaintiffs. Mr. Rajesh Talekar a/w. Mr. Nikhil Pai i/b. K. Ashar & Co. for Defendant No.1/Applicant in Notice of Motion. .... CORAM : S. J. KATHAWALLA, J. DATE : FEBRUARY 26, 2010. P.C. By this Notice of Motion the Defendants seeks to deposit the decretal amount in this Court as ordered in the Judgment dated 31st August, 2009, as follows : “(2). Suit is partly decreed by ordering the Defendants to pay sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) to the Plaintiffs which was received as token money by the original first Defendant together with interest thereon at the rate of 12 % per annum from the date of the Suit till its realisation and it is further declared that till this decree is satisfied, the charge will remain on the suit property to the extent of decretal amount.” 2 2. The learned Advocate appearing for the Defendants submits that though a cheque of Rs.50,000/- with further interest at the rate of 12 % per annum was sent to the Plaintiffs, they have returned the cheque stating that they have preferred an Appeal from the said Judgment. It is further submitted by the learned Advocate appearing for the Defendants that the Defendants are anxious to pay the said decretal amount to the Plaintiffs and/or to deposit the same in Court since the said order provides that till the decree is satisfied, a charge will remain on the suit property to the extent of the decreetal amount. Mr. Kothari, the learned Advocate appearing for the Plaintiffs states that the Plaintiffs shall not contend that they have a charge on the suit property or that the charge on the suit property continues, in view of the non- payment of the decreetal amount by the Defendants to the Plaintiffs and that the Plaintiffs shall also not claim 12 % interest on the amount of Rs. 50,000/- from the date the said cheque was received by the Plaintiffs from the Defendants. The said statement is accepted. Mr, Kothari has also confirmed that the Judgment dated 31st August, 2009 is not stayed by the Hon’ble Appellate Court. 3 3. In view of the aforestated statement made on behalf of the Plaintiffs, the learned Advocate appearing for the Defendants is not pressing the reliefs sought in the Notice of Motion. 4. The Notice of Motion is, accordingly disposed of with no order as to costs. [ S. J. KATHAWALLA, J. ]