Is a decree-holder permitted to withdraw a deposit only on furnishing security treated as having received payment in satisfaction of the decree?

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — s.36 — s.37(1)(b) — Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Order XXI Rule 1 — Deposit and payment — Interest cessation — Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Order XXI Rule 1 — Interest on court deposits — Held: Interest on a sum deposited pending appeal does not cease unless the deposit is unconditional and freely available for withdrawal. Where withdrawal is permitted only on furnishing security, the deposit is not payment in satisfaction of the decree or award. (¶21, 28) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Deposit and payment — Held further: A deposit is not synonymous with payment and neither extinguishes the debtor's liability nor places the money in the creditor's hands. A decree-holder permitted to withdraw only on furnishing security is not treated as having received payment in satisfaction of the decree. (¶2, 21) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Order XXI Rule 1 — Application to facts — Held further: In this case, the appellant's deposit was conditional and not freely available to the respondent for withdrawal, so it did not conform to Order XXI Rule 1 and the liability to pay interest did not cease. Appeal disposed of; impugned order affirmed. (¶27, 28, 47)