- (1.) In this application filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the appellant has prayed for slay of the operation of the award dated 21-06-2003 passed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.P.N. Sahdeo (retired) in Arbitration Case No. 1 of 2002.
(2.) According to the appellant, this appeal arises out of the award rendered in Arbitration Case No. 1 of 2002, whereby a sum of Rs. 2,32,61,908.30 has been awarded by way of compensation to the claimants- respondents, although the due compensation amount was already determined and the land owners had accepted the amount of compensation without any demur by way of full and final settlement as far back as in the year 1989. According to the appellant, the respondents are, thus, not at all entitled either in law or in equity or under the provisions of Rule 9 of Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable property Rules, 1953 to make any further claim. It has been stated that the award is apparently illegal and unsustainable and the appellant has a fair chance of success in the appeal. It has been further stated that if during pendency of this appeal, the amount is paid to the respondents, it would be extremely difficult for the appellant to recover the same from the respondents and as such, in the interests of justice, the said award dated 23-01-2000 should be stayed.
(3.) In reply to the said interlocutory application, the respondents contended that the award in question is in the nature of money decree and the same cannot be stayed. The appellant is duty- bound to pay the awarded sum in view of Section 9 and Rule 10(6) of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 and its Rules of 1953. It has been stated that in similar type of cases, this Court has directed the appellant to make payment of the awarded sum. It has been further stated that the respondents 1 to 9 are poor farmers and that they have accepted and received the payment of compensation amount in the year 1991, under protest. It has been further stated that the respondents have sufficient land and there will be no difficulty in paying back the money by them in case the appellant succeeds in appeal, which however, is a remote possibility.;