9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (8) TMI 934X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed the decree the appellants were not convicted. As noticed hereinbefore, the appeal is a continuation of the suit and in that view of the matter as the appellants had in total deposited a sum of ₹ 4,00,000/-, i.e., ₹ 2,10,000/- in the criminal proceeding and ₹ 1,90,000/- in the civil proceedings, out of which a sum of ₹ 3,09,000/- has been withdrawn by the respondent, the High Court was obligated to take the same into consideration. In other words, having regard to the provisions of Sub-section (5) of Section 357 of the Code, a duty was cast upon the High Court to take into account the fact that a sum of ₹ 2,00,000/- had already been paid by the appellants to the respondent. Concededly, both the proceedings were maintainable. Law recognizes the same. The Parliament must have the situation of this nature in mind while enacting Clause (b) of Sub-section (1) of Section 357 of the Code and Sub-section (5) thereof. We, therefore, are of the opinion that the impugned judgment should be modified and is directed to be modified accordingly. The matter is remitted to the learned Trial Judge. The learned Trial Judge is directed to take into consideration ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... State. In the said criminal proceedings, the appellants deposited a sum of ₹ 31,500/- on 7.02.2006, ₹ 68,500/- on 21.07.2006 and ₹ 1,10,000/- on 13.12.2006. 5. O.S. No. 1844 of 2004 was decreed by the Trial Court by a judgment and order dated 23.01.2006, ordering: This suit is hereby decreed for a sum of ₹ 3,09,000/- (Rupees three lakhs nine thousand only) with court costs and current interest at 6% p.a. on the principal amount of ₹ 2,00,000/- from the date of suit till realization. The defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the decrial amount. 6. In the civil proceedings also, the appellants admittedly have deposited a sum of ₹ 1,90,000/-. An appeal was preferred thereagainst before the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore marked as R.F.A. No. 1171 of 2006, which by reason of the impugned judgment has been dismissed. 7. The principal contention raised herein is that the Trial Court and consequently the High Court committed a serious error in decreeing the suit in its entirety, i.e., for a sum of ₹ 3,09,000/- with interest without taking into consideration the fact that an amount of ₹ 2,10,000/- had already ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 357 of the Code, which is relevant for our purpose, reads as under: 357. Order to pay compensation - (5) At the time of awarding compensation in any subsequent civil suit relating to the same matter, the Court shall take into account any sum paid or recovered as compensation under this section. 13. Evidently, a duty has been cast upon the civil courts to take into account the sum paid or recovered as compensation in terms of Section 357 of the Code. It is futile to urge that on the date on which the civil court passed the decree the appellants were not convicted. As noticed hereinbefore, the appeal is a continuation of the suit and in that view of the matter as the appellants had in total deposited a sum of ₹ 4,00,000/-, i.e., ₹ 2,10,000/- in the criminal proceeding and ₹ 1,90,000/- in the civil proceedings, out of which a sum of ₹ 3,09,000/- has been withdrawn by the respondent, the High Court was obligated to take the same into consideration. In other words, having regard to the provisions of Sub-section (5) of Section 357 of the Code, a duty was cast upon the High Court to take into account the fact that a sum of ₹ 2,00,000/- had al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a decree which may be passed. 40. Prosecution under the Act may be contemplated as a measure of deterrence, but the same is never meant to be a persecution. 41. Even in a case where violation of fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 is alleged, the amount of compensation cannot be arbitrary or unreasonable even under public law. [See also Manish Jalan v. State of Karnataka JT 2008 (7) SC 643] This Court therein adopted the doctrine of purposive construction. It was opined that compensation directed to be paid should be a reasonable one. 15. In New India Assurance Co. v. Nusli Neville Wadia and Anr. [2007 (14) SCALE 556], it was held: 50. Except in the first category of cases, as has been noticed by us hereinbefore, Sections 4 and 5 of the Act, in our opinion, may have to be construed differently in view of the decisions rendered by this Court. If the landlord being a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India is required to prove fairness and reasonableness on its part in initiating a proceeding, it is for it to show how its prayer meets the constitutional requirements of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. For proper interpre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
