IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.7357 of 2010 Date of Decision: 31.3.2011 State of Haryana ...... Petitioner vs. Kamlesh Batra ...... Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Sukant Gupta, Addl. A.G. Haryana for the petitioner. Mr. Bhag Singh, Advocate for the respondent. A.N.JINDAL, J This petition is directed against the order dated 10.08.2010, passed by the Addl. District Judge, Ambala, allowing the respondent-decree holder to receive interest on the deposited amount. Learned State counsel has argued that no amount of interest could be recovered by the claimants for the period during which the stay remained in operation and the amount remained deposited with the bank. Heard. The Division Bench of this Court while deciding the Later Patent Appeal No.366 of 1999 on 07.12.2005 had observed as under:- “Before parting with the judgment, it would be relevant to notice that when State of Haryana had filed the review applications before the learned Single Judge, then vide an order dated July 19, 2000, the execution proceedings were stayed. Subsequently, on March 27, 2001, the following order was passed:- “Learned Advocate General, Haryana, appearing for the State submitted that the Government shall own responsibility of the claimant(s) suffer any money loss on account of non-payment of compensation, at this juncture in view of the stay order of this Court more particularly keeping in view the fact that tax at source had already been deducted by the Government and deposited with the income tax authorities. The Civil Revision No.7357 of 2010 -2- consideration of the present application, on merits, will invite the same contentions which are to be considered by the Court for deciding the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act as well as the review application filed under Order 47 Rule 1 and 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure.” In view of the statement of the learned Advocate General, the ad-interim stay granted by this Court shall continue till disposal of the application. It will be more in the interest of justice to continue the ad-interim order as the application has already been fixed for final disposal on 18.04.2001. In view of the position stated above, it is directed that the executing Court where the State has deposited the amount would create fixed deposit receipt in the name of the Court in a nationalized bank immediately and for doing so the registry of this Court shall inform the executing Court telephonically/ telegraphically. In these circumstances, we direct that amount of the aforesaid fixed deposits along with the interest accrued thereupon shall be released to the claimants. The amount of interest which has accrued upon the aforesaid fixed deposits shall not be taken into consideration while making the payment of compensation or other benefits to the claimants, as directed by this Court in the present appeals.” From the perusal of the aforesaid order, it transpires that since the amount of interest accrued upon the fixed deposit receipts, was not to be taken into consideration while making the payment of compensation or other benefits to the claimants, as directed by the Court, therefore, the respondent was entitled to all the benefits as ordered by the High Court. However, the amount already received by the respondent would be adjusted. Resultantly, this petition is dismissed. March 31, 2011 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge