TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether Order XXI Rule 1(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 applied to execution of an award under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 in the State of Haryana, and whether the judgment debtor was liable to pay interest for the period between deposit of the decretal amount and notice of such deposit to the decree holders.
Analysis: The Rules applicable in Haryana were held to have been adopted from the Punjab Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Rules as they stood on the date of adoption, including the amendment inserting Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Even apart from express applicability, the Tribunal was bound to apply the underlying procedural principle that a deposit without notice does not amount to effective payment to the decree holder. The provision was treated as procedural in nature and therefore applicable to the execution of the award. The Court also held that the purpose of awarding just compensation would be defeated if the claimant were deprived of use of the amount because no notice of deposit was given.
Conclusion: Order XXI Rule 1(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was applicable, and the appellant remained liable to pay interest until notice of the deposit reached the decree holders.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed and the award of further interest against the appellant was sustained.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a motor accident claims tribunal award is executed under rules that have adopted the relevant civil procedure provision, or where the underlying procedural principle is consistent with fair adjudication, a deposit of the decretal amount without notice to the decree holder does not stop the running of interest.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
