Paramount Limited v. Gail(India) Limited

$30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + EX.P.49/2011 &EA(OS) 109/2011 PARAMOUNT LIMITED Decree Holder Through: Mr. Mohit D. Ram and Ms. Monisha Handa, Advocates versus GAIL(INDIA) LIMITED Judgement Debtor O Through: Mr. Ajit Pudussery and Ms. Shruti Sarma Hazarika, Advocates + EX.P. 50/2011 & EA (OS) 110/2011 PARAMOUNT LIMITED Decree Holder Through: Mr. Mohit D. Ram and Ms. Monisha Handa, Advocates versus GAIL(INDIA) LIMITED Judgement Debtor Through: Mr. Ajit Pudussery and Ms. Shruti Sarma Hazarika, Advocates

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA

ORDER

% 03.09.2015 1.

Learned counsel for the judgment debtor submits that the judgment debtor has deposited the decretal amount with this Court under the orders passed by the Division Bench in FAO(OS) Nos.583/2010 and 586/2010 and the said amount has been released against bank guarantee to the decree holder.

2.

Learned counsel for the decree holder admits the receipts of the By:AMULYA

II decretal amount against the bank guarantees. Learned counsel for the decree holder submits that in the event of the judgment debtor's appeal being dismissed and the bank guarantee being returned to the decree holder, the decree holder would be entitled to the margin money spent by the decree holder in issuance and keeping the bank guarantee alive. It is further submitted that the decree holder would also be entitled to further interest. 3.

Learned counsel for the decree holder seeks permission to withdraw these execution petitions with liberty to file a fresh execution petitions if the • occasion so arises.

4.

Execution petitions as well as pending applications are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.

41.

DHA, J.

SEPTEMBER 03, 2015 rsk