Back
2021 Supreme(UK) 248
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Raghvendra Singh Chauhan, Alok Kumar Verma, JJ.
M/s Jai Bhawani Stone Crusher - Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand & Ors. - Respondents
Special Appeal No. 383 of 2021
Decided On : 17-11-2021
Rakesh Thapliyal, Advocate, Pankaj Chaturvedi, Advocate, S.S. Chaudhary, Advocate, Alok Kumar, Advocate, Sandeep Kothari, Advocate
The court allowed the appellant to provide a bank guarantee instead of a direct deposit, modifying the original conditional stay order.
Headnote:
Bank Guarantee - Stay Order - The court modified the order to allow the appellant to deposit a sum of Rupees One Crore through a bank guarantee within three weeks, and if submitted, the operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed during the pendency of the Writ Petition.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant challenged the legality of a conditional stay order requiring the deposit of a sum of Rupees One Crore within two weeks.
Finding of the Court:
The court modified the order, directing the appellant to deposit the amount through a bank guarantee within three weeks, and if submitted, the operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed during the pendency of the Writ Petition.
Issues:
Ratio Decidendi: The court allowed the appellant to deposit the required amount through a bank guarantee within three weeks, providing relief from the original condition imposed by the learned Single Judge.
Final Decision: The Special Appeal stands disposed of with the modifications, and no order as to costs was given.
JUDGMENT
Raghvendra Singh Chauhan, CJ. - The appellant has challenged the legality of the order dated 25.10.2021, passed by a learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2174 of 2021, whereby the learned Single Judge has passed a conditional stay order while imposing a condition that in case the appellant were to deposit a sum of Rupees One Crore with the Registry of this Court within two weeks from the date of the order, the recovery pursuant to the order dated 28.09.2021 shall remain stayed.
2. Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant, submits that the appellant is, indeed, willing to deposit the said amount, but only through a bank guarantee. For, the appellant does not have such a large sum of Rupees One Crore available with him. However, the appellant is willing to deposit the said amount through a bank guarantee. Moreover, since three weeks’ time would be required to submit the bank guarantee, the learned Senior Counsel prays that the two weeks’ time granted by the learned Single Judge should be extended, and three weeks’ time should be granted by this Court for the appellant to submit the bank guarantee.
3. Therefore, this Court modifies the order dated 25.10.2021, and directs the appellant to deposit a sum of Rupees One Crore through a bank guarantee within a period of three weeks from today. If the said bank guarantee is, indeed, submitted before the Registry of this Court within the stipulated period, then the operation of the impugned order dated 28.09.2021 shall remain stayed during the pendency of the Writ Petition.
4. With these modifications, this Special Appeal stands disposed of.
5. No order as to costs.
