The Additional District Judge by his order dated May 2, 1992 directed adjustment as prayed for.
On an analysis of the directions they would run like this i the amount received from the Prothonotary, High Court of Bombay with interest payable thereon companyputable as on March 31, 1986 and lying in the account of the second respondent Kakkani be adjusted to the decree debt due and payable by the first respondent ii the amount companyputed was on that date would be Rs.5,37,017 16 ps.
297/92, dated 10.5.1995 has given in paragraph 11 certain directions in a companyfused fumbling way and ultimately disposed of the revision in the light of the directions companytained therein.
iii the judgment debtor R.M. Patwa was directed to reimburse the amount adjusted by the Bank to the second respondent within three months thereafter.
7823 in Civil Suit No36.77 B/76 81.
Therein the judgment debtor made an application under Section 151 CPC on March 4, 1986 with a request that amounts lying to the credit of the second respondent G.K.Kakkani, Proprietor, M s. Oriental Traders lying with the appellant decree holder, may be adjusted towards the decree debt.
It is number clear from the facts that there is a dispute between the appellants and Kakkani and a writ petition filed under Article 226 in Bombay High Court for recovery of the amount was dismissed SLP was also dismssed by this Court.
The appellant Bank had obtained a money decree against the first respondent R.M. Patwa, proprietor, M s. Indian Crude Corporation, Indore and another for a sum of Rs.55,000/ with interest at 9 per annum and future interest by decree dated April 6, 1981.
Leave granted.
and after adjustment of the said amount,the appellant was directed to pay over the balance amount to Kakkani with interest at 19 till the date of the payment.
When the appellant carried the matter in revision, the High Court in Civil Revision No.
The facts are very simple but the learned Judge has made them companyplicated ones.
The appellant filed an execution application case No.
