The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs. Parwat Singh (Deceased) Through Lrs

COURT NO.16

SECTION $IV-C$

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos.11026-11027/2022

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 21-02-2022 in FA No. 44/2007 & Order dated 10-05-2022 in RA No. 297/2022 passed by the High Court of M.P. Principal Seat at Jabalpur)

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.

VERSUS

PARWAT SINGH (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS

(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.87122/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA No.87123/2022-EXEMPTION FROM and IA No.87120/2022-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL FILING O.T. DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)

Date: 24-06-2022 These petitions were called on for hearing today.

$CORAM:$

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.T. RAVIKUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSHU DHULIA (VACATION BENCH)

For Petitioner(s)

Mr. Saurabh Mishra, AAG, MP Mr. Sunny Choudhary, AOR Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Adv.

For Respondent(s)

Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Awanish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Shiv Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Chandrashekhar A. Chakalabbi, Adv. Mr. Anshu Rai, Adv.

• Mr. Abhinav Garg, Adv.
• Mr. D. Girish Kumar, Adv.
• Mr. Kumar Vinayakar Gupta, Adv.
• For M/s.Dharmaprabhas Law Associates, AOR

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following ORDER

Petitioner(s)

$Respondent(s)$

2. Applications seeking exemption from filing certified copy of the impugned order as also for seeking exemption from filing the official translation of the Annexures are allowed.

3. Issue notice.

4. Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Senior counsel appears with Mr. Chandrashekhar A. Chakalabbi, learned AdvocateonRecord, for Respondents – caveator accepts and waives formal notice on behalf of the said respondents.

5. We direct the petitioners to deposit the amount mentioned by them in Page `C' of the list of dates wherein they have stated: "if the directions issued by the High Court in the impugned order dated 2122022 to pay interest from the year 1950 is not stayed than the State of M.P./Petitioner will have to pay Rs.3,68,33,934/." It is thus abundantly clear that going through their own estimate, if the direction is to be complied, then an amount of Rs.3,68,33,934/ has to be deposited.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners hastened to add that in fact that they are not liable to pay such an amount and according to learned counsel, even for compliance with the order, they need to deposit Rs.3,68,33,934/ less an amount of Rs.1,48,01,557/ which was already deposited.

7. Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Senior counsel appearing for the caveat submitted that the amount payable by way of interest to comply with the direction in the orders dated 2122022 and 1052022 would be much higher than Rs.3,68,33,934/.

8. We are not going into the said controversy now.

9. Under the circumstances obtained in this case, we direct the petitioners to deposit an amount of Rs.3,68,33,934/ in the name of Registrar of this Court.

10. Upon deposit the said amount by the petitioners, the same shall be deposited in a shortterm Fixed Deposit Receipt in any Nationalized Bank to accrue interest thereon with autorenewal facility.

2

11. The amount directed to be deposited shall be deposited by the petitioners within a period of three weeks from today.

12. The execution proceedings shall remain stayed, subject to the satisfaction of the aforesaid condition.

13. The respondent will be at liberty to file counter affidavit.

(VISHAL ANAND) (VIRENDER SINGH) ASTT. REGISTRARcumPS BRANCH OFFICER