SOLANA RAMACHANDRA RAO & ORS. vs MADDI KUTUMBA RAO & ANR.

The Supreme Court held that under Order XXI, Rule 89(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure, a deposit of the amount due to the decree-holder is mandatory unless the decree has been satisfied or adjusted. The Court clarified that a mere promise to ensure payment does not equate to satisfaction of the decree. In this case, since the decree was not satisfied and merely postponed, the requirement for deposit was upheld, leading to the dismissal of the receiver's appeal against the High Court's order.