-1- IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3405 OF 2007 APPLICATION NO.3405 OF 2007 APPLICATION NO.3405 OF 2007 IN IN IN FIRST FIRST FIRST APPEAL NO.2269 OF 2007 APPEAL NO.2269 OF 2007 APPEAL NO.2269 OF 2007 Oriental Venus P.Ltd. ...Applicant vs. Chagan Thema Shinde ...Respondent Mr.Khandeparkar i/b M/s.Khandeparkar & Associates for the Applicant Mr.K.K.Malpathak for the Respondent. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA, J. A.S.OKA, J. A.S.OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : JANUARY 22,2008 : JANUARY 22,2008 : JANUARY 22,2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard Advocates for the parties. The Applicant/Appellant has deposited a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- in this court. The money decree passed by the trial court which is impugned in the Appeal is in the sum of Rs.3,00,000/-. 2. The Respondent-plaintiff was at the relevant time performing his duty as a Police Constable. He was posted on duty outside the factory premises of the Applicant. According to the case of the Respondent, a mob of some persons gathered near the premises of the Applicant. The said mob assaulted the Respondent-Police Constable by sticks. The Respondent was assaulted mercilessly by the mob and as a result he suffered multiple injuries and fracture. According to the Respondent he suffered serious injuries. The claim for compensation made in the suit filed by the Respondent is on account of injuries -2- sustained by him. 3. It is an admitted position that the Respondent at the relevant time was performing his duty as a Police Constable outside the premises of the Applicant. The main submission of the Applicant in the Appeal is that by no stretch of imagination, the Applicant can be held liable to compensate the Respondent-police constable. Even going by the findings recorded by the trial court in the impugned Judgment, prima facie, there is a serious doubt about the liability of the Applicant to pay compensation to the Respondent. 4. The impugned decree is a money decree. This is a fit case for making a departure from the normal rule of directing deposit the entire amount payable under the money decree as a condition for grant of stay especially when the Applicant has already deposited Rs.1,00,000/-. Interests of justice will be served if the Applicant is directed to furnish security for the balance decretal amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. The Respondent can be permitted to withdraw the said amount of Rs.1,00,000/- on furnishing adequate security for the said amount. 5. Hence, Application is disposed of by passing the following order : i) There will be interim relief in terms of prayer clause -3- (a) subject to the Applicant furnishing adequate security for the balance decretal amount of Rs.2,00,000/- to the satisfaction of the Registrar (Judicial-I) of this Court within a period of eight weeks from today. If compliance is not made interim stay will stand vacated without further reference to the court. The Respondent will be heard before accepting the security. ii) The Respondent is hereby permitted to withdraw the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- deposited by the applicant in this court subject to furnishing adequate security for the said amount to the satisfaction of the learned Registrar (Judicial-I) of this court. The Applicant will be heard before accepting the security. iii) If the Respondent fails to withdraw the amount on furnishing adequate security within a period of four months from today, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- shall be invested in fixed deposit in any nationalised bank and the fixed deposit shall be renewed from time to time till the final disposal of the Appeal. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE