[2025:RJ-JP:2371] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21613/2017 Punjab National Bank, A Body Corporate, Constituted Under The Banking Companies (Acquisition And Transfer Of Undertakings) Act, 1970, Having Its Head Office At Plot No. -4, Sector-0, Dwarka, New Delhi-110075 And The Successor Of Oriental Bank Of Commerce, By Scheme Of Amalgamation Of Oriental Bank Of Commerce/ United Bank Of India, Passed By The Central Government Under Sector 9 Of The Banking Companies (Acquisition And Transfer Of Undertakings) Act, 1980, Through One Of Its Branch Office At Ajmer Road, Jaipur (Rajasthan) ----Petitioner Versus 1. Lalchand, Son Of Late Mr. Gyarsa 2. Sitaram Son Of Late Mr. Gyarsa, (Deceased During Pendency Of Suit) 2/1. Mrs. Sujaya Devi, Wife Of Late Mr. Sitaram, (Deceased) 2/2. Ms. Bhanwari Devi, Daughter Of Late Mr. Sitaram 2/3. Ms. Lali Devi, Daughter Of Late Mr. Sitaram 2/4. Ms. Phooli Devi, Daughter Of Late Mr. Sitaram 2/5. Sushil Kumar Alias Sushilal, Son Of Late Mr. Sitaram 2/6. Tarachand, Son Of Late Mr. Sitaram 2/7. Ratanlal, Son Of Late Mr. Sitaram 2/8. Ms. Manbhar Devi, Daughter Of Late Mr. Sitaram 2/9. Ms. Gyatri Devi, Daughter Of Late Mr. Sitaram 2/10. Ms. Santra Devi, Daughter Of Late Mr. Sitaram 3. Hanuman, Son Of Late Mr. Gyarsa 4. Prabhunarayan Son Of Late Mr. Gyarsa, All Residents Of Dehar Ka Balaji, Chomu Road, Jaipur (Rajasthan) 5. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Urban Development And Housing Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan) 6. Jaipur Development Authority, Through Secretary, J.l.n. Marg, Jaipur (Rajasthan) 7. Land Acquisition Officer, Jaipur Development Authority, J.l.n. Marg, Jaipur (Rajasthan) [2025:RJ-JP:2371] (2 of 4) [CW-21613/2017] 8. The Secretary, Mutual Co-Operative Housing Society Limited, Chomu House Area, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Rajasthan) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Sonia Shandilya, Adv. Mr. Akshat Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Abhi Goyal, Adv. with Ms. Meenal Bhargava, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order 17/01/2025 This Civil Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 03.03.2017 passed by Senior Civil Judge, Jaipur Metropolitan in Execution Petition No.13/2016, whereby the application filed by the respondent under Section 151 CPC has been allowed and he has been held entitled to get the amount of Rs.15,24,163/- w.e.f. 24.03.2003 on auto renewal basis. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent Nos.1 to 4 filed execution petition against the respondent Nos.5 to 8 in which they sought amount in view of land acquisition separately. In the said execution petition, the respondent Nos.1 to 4 filed an application before executing court under Section 151 CPC in which official respondents stated that Jaipur Development Authority had sent a cheque No.245894 of Rs.15,24,163/- on 23.02.2001 after deducting TDS thereon and executing court on 24.03.2001 deposited the said amount in FDR for two years with interest @ 9.5% per annum. It was prayed by the respondents that the said fixed deposit with the said rate of interest should be [2025:RJ-JP:2371] (3 of 4) [CW-21613/2017] continued in future but concerned bank had awarded very meagre interest instead of 9.5% per annum. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that executing court vide order dated 03.03.2017 had not considered the arguments of the petitioner. The said FDR was for two years, so it could not be auto renewed. Petitioner bank had issued a guideline as per RBI instruction on 29.02.2008 that if any fixed deposit is made, then it would be auto renewed after expiry of the period. In the year 2003, the said guideline was not prevalent. So, executing court had committed error in directing the petitioner to pay the interest from 24.03.2003 on the said amount on auto renewal basis. So, order dated 03.03.2017 passed by executing court be set aside. Learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that amount was deposited with the bank, so it was the duty of the bank to auto renew the FDR. So, executing court rightly ordered to pay the interest on the amount from 24.03.2003 as the FDR was auto renewed. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents. It is an admitted position that executing court had deposited the amount of Rs.15,24,163/- for two years on 24.03.2001, which was completed in the year 2003. In the year 2003, there was no guideline regarding auto renewal of FDR but in my considered opinion, petitioner bank had issued guideline on 29.02.2008 for auto renewal of FDR at the same rate of interest which were [2025:RJ-JP:2371] (4 of 4) [CW-21613/2017] existing in the bank. So, respondents are entitled to get benefit of auto renewal from 29.02.2008 instead of 24.03.2003. So, order dated 03.03.2017 passed by executing court is required to be modified. The Civil Writ Petition is party allowed. The order dated 03.03.2017 passed by executing court is modified to the extent that respondent Nos.1 to 4 are entitled to get interest as per guideline of the bank dated 29.02.2008 on the amount of FDR on auto renewal basis. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Jatin /02