wp4009.11 1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ WRIT PETITION NO. 4009 OF 2011 THE STATE OF MAH THR. COLLECTOR AHMEDNAGAR VERSUS VIJAY MOTILAL HIRAKHANWALA AND ANR ... AGP for Petitioner : Mr. N.R. Shaikh,AGP ... CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J. Dated: November 29, 2011 ... Heard learned AGP for the petitioner. 2 This petition takes exception to the order passed by the C.J.S.D., Shrirampur on 11th June, 2010. The trial Court, taking into consideration the fact that the amount of cheque was deposited by the J.D. No.2 with J.D. No.1 i.e. petitioner herein on 28th March, 2008, held that the petitioner herein should have deposited the said cheque on 28th March, 2008 or within a couple of days. However, the said cheque was deposited by J.D. No.1 i.e. petitioner herein on 29th May, 2008 and no notice was issued to the decree holders as per requirements of Order 21, Rule wp4009.11 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ 1(2) of the C.P. Code, and therefore, the petitioner is liable to pay the interest at the rate of 15% from 28th March, 2008 till 14th October, 2008. 3 The contention of the learned AGP is that the petitioner was not sure about the calculation of the amount and also the petitioner wanted to challenge the said order by way of filing appeal and in the process, time was consumed. 4 After perusal of the para 9 of the impugned judgment and order passed by the trial Court, the findings recorded therein are in consonance with the material on record. The petitioner has also not followed the procedure under Order 21, Rule 1(2) of C.P.C., no notice was issued by the petitioner to the decree holder. It is not in dispute that the amount was deposited by the J.D. No.2 with J.D. No.1 on 28th March, 2008. There does not appear to be any valid reason for not depositing the said cheque wp4009.11 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ immediately or within a couple of days as observed by the trial Court. However, it took more than two months to deposit the cheque. The petitioners have failed to explain as to why the requirement as mandated under Order 21, Rule 1(2) of C.P.C. has not been followed by them. The calculation of the interest amount as arrived by the trial Court for the period from 1st April, 2008 till 9 th June, 2008 does not appear to be unreasonable. The view taken by the trial Court is reasonable and in consonance with the material brought on record. 5 Therefore, no case is made out to interfere with the impugned order. Writ Petition stands rejected. (S.S. SHINDE, J.) PLK/*