[1] IN THE HIGH COURTOF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO. 1124 OF 2002 IN CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 594 OF 2002 IN EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO. 175 OF 2002 IN SUMMARY SUITNO. 1395 OF 2001 Oriental Bank of Commerce ... Appellant. (Formerly Global Trust Bank) Vs. Vijay Tanks & Vessels Ltd. & Anr.... Respondents. Mr. H.N.Thakore with Mr. Sameer Khedekar i/b. Thakore Jariwala & Associates for the appellant. Mr. Rohit Kapadia Sr. Avocate with .B.Khamdin & Vivek Vashi i/b. Bharucha and Partners for respondent No.1. CORAM CORAM CORAM : D.K.Deshmukh and : D.K.Deshmukh and : D.K.Deshmukh and A.A.Sayed, A.A.Sayed, A.A.Sayed, JJ. JJ. JJ. DATE DATE DATE : February 24, 2009. : February 24, 2009. : February 24, 2009. [2] P.C. 1. By this appeal, the appellant challenge the order passed in Chamber Summons No. 594 of 2002 by the learned Single Judge of this Court, dated 23rd August, 2002. By that order, the learned Single Judge has granted that Chamber Summons in terms of prayer clause (a). 2. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant. He submits that the M/s. Geekay Exim (India) Ltd., who was the respondent in the Chamber Summons should have led oral and documentary evidence before the learned Single Judge. He submits that oral and documentary evidence would be necessary to prove that the various companies that are involved in affairs of the respondent form one group. 3. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the respondent. He has no objection to the matter being remitted back to learned Single Judge so that both the parties would get an opportunity to lead the evidence. 4. It is common ground that because of the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, an amount of Rs. 5,02,47,037.99/- has been deposited by [3] the appellants in this Court, which is presently lying in fixed deposit and invested. The deposit of the amount was ordered to secure interest of the respondent who had taken out the Chamber summons 5. In view of rival submissions made, in our opinion, the following order would meet the ends of justice. (1) The order impugned in the appeal, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Chamber Summons No. 594 of 2002 is remitted back to the learned Single Judge for de novo trial and hearing and disposal in accordance with law. (2) The learned Single Judge is requested to afford an opportunity to lead evidence to both the parties, if they so apply. (3) The Prothonotary and Senior Master shall permit the respondent Vijay Tanks and vessels Ltd. to withdraw the amount which has been deposited in this Court, referred to above, with accruals, on their furnishing an undertaking to this Court to bring back the amount if so directed by this Court and on such [4] terms and conditions as may be directed by this Court and on furnishing security to the satisfaction of the Prothonotary and Senior Master of this Court. (4) It is noted that the Prothonotary and Senior Master will not accept any security furnished by the respondent Vijay Tanks Vessels Ltd. without granting an opportunity of being heard to the appellants. The Prothonotary and Senior Master shall permit the respondents to withdraw the said amount with accruals, if any. The withdrawal shall be permitted within a period of six weeks from today. If the amount is not withdrawn within the aforesaid period as directed above, the amount shall lie in deposit as invested during the pendency of the Chamber Summons. . The appeal disposed of. [D.K.Deshmukh, [D.K.Deshmukh, [D.K.Deshmukh, J.] J.] J.] [A.A.Sayed, [A.A.Sayed, [A.A.Sayed, J.] J.] J.]