IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY AT BOMBAY AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION JUDGES ORDER NO.418 OF 2006 JUDGES ORDER NO.418 OF 2006 JUDGES ORDER NO.418 OF 2006 IN IN IN CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1117 OF 2005 CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1117 OF 2005 CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1117 OF 2005 IN IN IN SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO.552 OF 1996 SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO.552 OF 1996 SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO.552 OF 1996 IN IN IN SUMMARY SUIT NO.3027 OF 1995 SUMMARY SUIT NO.3027 OF 1995 SUMMARY SUIT NO.3027 OF 1995 The Cotton Market Labour Board of The Cotton Market Labour Board of The Cotton Market Labour Board of Greater Bombay, Thane. ...Plaintiff Greater Bombay, Thane. ...Plaintiff Greater Bombay, Thane. ...Plaintiff Vs. Vs. Vs. The Cosmos Co-operative Bank Ltd. ...Defendants The Cosmos Co-operative Bank Ltd. ...Defendants The Cosmos Co-operative Bank Ltd. ...Defendants Mr.S.R.Ganbarale i/b. Sangramsingh Yadav for Plaintiff Mr.S.R.Ganbarale i/b. Sangramsingh Yadav for Plaintiff Mr.S.R.Ganbarale i/b. Sangramsingh Yadav for Plaintiff CORAM: SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J. CORAM: SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J. CORAM: SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J. DATED: 11TH JANUARY, 2007 DATED: 11TH JANUARY, 2007 DATED: 11TH JANUARY, 2007 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. An order came to be passed on 23rd November, 1998 in 1. An order came to be passed on 23rd November, 1998 in 1. An order came to be passed on 23rd November, 1998 in Summons for Judgment No.552 of 1996 taken out in this Suit Summons for Judgment No.552 of 1996 taken out in this Suit Summons for Judgment No.552 of 1996 taken out in this Suit for deposit of Rs.55,40,000/- which represented the for deposit of Rs.55,40,000/- which represented the for deposit of Rs.55,40,000/- which represented the principal amount in the Suit. Upon such deposit leave to principal amount in the Suit. Upon such deposit leave to principal amount in the Suit. Upon such deposit leave to defend was granted. The interest amount claimed by the defend was granted. The interest amount claimed by the defend was granted. The interest amount claimed by the Plaintiff was not directed to be deposited. Plaintiff was not directed to be deposited. Plaintiff was not directed to be deposited. 2. The Plaintiffs applied for withdrawal of the amount 2. The Plaintiffs applied for withdrawal of the amount 2. The Plaintiffs applied for withdrawal of the amount of Rs.55,40,000/- deposited in the Court. In Chamber of Rs.55,40,000/- deposited in the Court. In Chamber of Rs.55,40,000/- deposited in the Court. In Chamber Summons No.468 of 1999 an order came to be passed on 7th Summons No.468 of 1999 an order came to be passed on 7th Summons No.468 of 1999 an order came to be passed on 7th September, 1999 by Justice Das allowing the withdrawal. September, 1999 by Justice Das allowing the withdrawal. September, 1999 by Justice Das allowing the withdrawal. There after the Plaintiff took out Chamber Summons No.1117 There after the Plaintiff took out Chamber Summons No.1117 There after the Plaintiff took out Chamber Summons No.1117 of 2005 again for permission to withdraw the said sum of of 2005 again for permission to withdraw the said sum of of 2005 again for permission to withdraw the said sum of Rs.55,40,000/- together with interest earned on the deposit Rs.55,40,000/- together with interest earned on the deposit Rs.55,40,000/- together with interest earned on the deposit of the said amount from 8th February, 1999. of the said amount from 8th February, 1999. of the said amount from 8th February, 1999. 3. It appears that the amount ordered to be deposited 3. It appears that the amount ordered to be deposited 3. It appears that the amount ordered to be deposited in the Summons for Judgment by the order dated 23rd in the Summons for Judgment by the order dated 23rd in the Summons for Judgment by the order dated 23rd November, 1998 was deposited in Court on 8th February, 1999 November, 1998 was deposited in Court on 8th February, 1999 November, 1998 was deposited in Court on 8th February, 1999 by 2 separate cheques for Rs.699500/- and Rs.48,47,500/-. by 2 separate cheques for Rs.699500/- and Rs.48,47,500/-. by 2 separate cheques for Rs.699500/- and Rs.48,47,500/-. 4. Despite the order dated 17th September, 1999 the 4. Despite the order dated 17th September, 1999 the 4. Despite the order dated 17th September, 1999 the Plaintiff did not withdraw Rs.55,40,000/- and once again Plaintiff did not withdraw Rs.55,40,000/- and once again Plaintiff did not withdraw Rs.55,40,000/- and once again applied by a Chamber Summons taken out 6 years thereafter applied by a Chamber Summons taken out 6 years thereafter applied by a Chamber Summons taken out 6 years thereafter for withdrawal with interest earned on the said deposit. for withdrawal with interest earned on the said deposit. for withdrawal with interest earned on the said deposit. 5. It appears that the deposit of Rs.6,99,500/- came to 5. It appears that the deposit of Rs.6,99,500/- came to 5. It appears that the deposit of Rs.6,99,500/- came to be invested by the office of this Court. The deposit of be invested by the office of this Court. The deposit of be invested by the office of this Court. The deposit of Rs.48,47,500/- was not invested. Rs.48,47,500/- was not invested. Rs.48,47,500/- was not invested. 6. There appears to be a lapse on account of negligence 6. There appears to be a lapse on account of negligence 6. There appears to be a lapse on account of negligence by the Clerks as stated in report submitted by the by the Clerks as stated in report submitted by the by the Clerks as stated in report submitted by the Prothonotory and Senior Master of this Court in that regard. Prothonotory and Senior Master of this Court in that regard. Prothonotory and Senior Master of this Court in that regard. The Plaintiffs have been allowed to withdraw Rs.55,40,000/- The Plaintiffs have been allowed to withdraw Rs.55,40,000/- The Plaintiffs have been allowed to withdraw Rs.55,40,000/- together with the interest earned on the deposit from 8th together with the interest earned on the deposit from 8th together with the interest earned on the deposit from 8th February, 1999 till the date of the Chambers Summons/ the February, 1999 till the date of the Chambers Summons/ the February, 1999 till the date of the Chambers Summons/ the date of the order on the Chamber Summons dated 13th date of the order on the Chamber Summons dated 13th date of the order on the Chamber Summons dated 13th December, 2005. December, 2005. December, 2005. 7. The Plaintiffs have now taken out this Judge’s Order 7. The Plaintiffs have now taken out this Judge’s Order 7. The Plaintiffs have now taken out this Judge’s Order for payment of interest of Rs.31,08,910/- by the for payment of interest of Rs.31,08,910/- by the for payment of interest of Rs.31,08,910/- by the Prothonotory and Senior Master of this Court as per order Prothonotory and Senior Master of this Court as per order Prothonotory and Senior Master of this Court as per order dated 13th December, 2005. It is contended on behalf of the dated 13th December, 2005. It is contended on behalf of the dated 13th December, 2005. It is contended on behalf of the Plaintiffs that the order dated 13th December, 2005 permits Plaintiffs that the order dated 13th December, 2005 permits Plaintiffs that the order dated 13th December, 2005 permits Plaintiffs to withdraw Rs.55,40,000/- together with all the Plaintiffs to withdraw Rs.55,40,000/- together with all the Plaintiffs to withdraw Rs.55,40,000/- together with all the interest that could have accrued due on the investment of interest that could have accrued due on the investment of interest that could have accrued due on the investment of the deposited amount from the date of the deposit. No such the deposited amount from the date of the deposit. No such the deposited amount from the date of the deposit. No such thing can be read into the order dated 13th December, 2005. thing can be read into the order dated 13th December, 2005. thing can be read into the order dated 13th December, 2005. In fact no such thing can be read into prayer (a) of the In fact no such thing can be read into prayer (a) of the In fact no such thing can be read into prayer (a) of the Chamber Summons No.1117 of 2005 in which the order came to Chamber Summons No.1117 of 2005 in which the order came to Chamber Summons No.1117 of 2005 in which the order came to be passed also. be passed also. be passed also. 8. The amount of the deposit is ordered to be withdrawn 8. The amount of the deposit is ordered to be withdrawn 8. The amount of the deposit is ordered to be withdrawn on 7th September, 1999 as well as 13th December, 2005. It on 7th September, 1999 as well as 13th December, 2005. It on 7th September, 1999 as well as 13th December, 2005. It is contended that the office of this Court committed the is contended that the office of this Court committed the is contended that the office of this Court committed the lapse in not investing the deposited amount. However, it is lapse in not investing the deposited amount. However, it is lapse in not investing the deposited amount. However, it is seen that the Plaintiffs also committed lapse in not seen that the Plaintiffs also committed lapse in not seen that the Plaintiffs also committed lapse in not applying for the withdrawal of the amount deposited despite applying for the withdrawal of the amount deposited despite applying for the withdrawal of the amount deposited despite obtaining order in that behalf. Consequently the claim of obtaining order in that behalf. Consequently the claim of obtaining order in that behalf. Consequently the claim of the Plaintiff now to interest of Rs.31,08,910/- is the Plaintiff now to interest of Rs.31,08,910/- is the Plaintiff now to interest of Rs.31,08,910/- is misconceived. misconceived. misconceived. 9. The Plaintiffs appear to be diligent in making 9. The Plaintiffs appear to be diligent in making 9. The Plaintiffs appear to be diligent in making applications for withdrawal of the amount but not diligent applications for withdrawal of the amount but not diligent applications for withdrawal of the amount but not diligent in executing the orders which are passed. The order dated in executing the orders which are passed. The order dated in executing the orders which are passed. The order dated 7th September, 1999 is remained unexecuted through the last 7th September, 1999 is remained unexecuted through the last 7th September, 1999 is remained unexecuted through the last 6 years. 6 years. 6 years. 10. The Plaintiff’s Advocate states that the Plaintiffs 10. The Plaintiff’s Advocate states that the Plaintiffs 10. The Plaintiff’s Advocate states that the Plaintiffs have received an amount of Rs.62,82,858/- that constitutes have received an amount of Rs.62,82,858/- that constitutes have received an amount of Rs.62,82,858/- that constitutes complete compliance of the order dated 13th December, 2005. complete compliance of the order dated 13th December, 2005. complete compliance of the order dated 13th December, 2005. No further amount by way of interest or otherwise need be No further amount by way of interest or otherwise need be No further amount by way of interest or otherwise need be paid to the Plaintiff by the Office of this Court in this paid to the Plaintiff by the Office of this Court in this paid to the Plaintiff by the Office of this Court in this Suit. Application by way of the Judge’s Order is rejected. Suit. Application by way of the Judge’s Order is rejected. Suit. Application by way of the Judge’s Order is rejected. (SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J.) (SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J.) (SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J.)