Delhi High Court
Re-M/S Jvg Finance Ltd. vs ...... on 5 July, 2018
Author: Jayant Nath
Bench: Jayant Nath
$~CP-15
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 05.07.2018
+ CO.PET. 265/1998
RE-M/S JVG FINANCE LTD. ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Anuj Aggarwal, Adv for UOI
Ms.Aneeta Sharma, AR for ex-director/JVG
Group
Ms.Manisha Singh and Ms.Swati Setia, Advs. for
RBI.
Mr.Y.P.Singh, Proxy Counsel for Ms.Atryee
Gautam, Adv. for the applicant in CA No.
727/2018
Mr.Ashutosh Dubey and Mr.Abhishek Chauhan,
Adv. for the applicant in CA No. 2771, 2773/2015
Mr.Yogesh Kr. Jagia and Mr. Rajeev Kumar,
Advs. in CA 646/2014
Mr.Manish Sharma and Mr.Saurabh Soni, Advs.
for the applicant in CA No. 590/2018
Mr.Kunal Sharma, Adv. for the OL
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH
JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL)
Co.Appl. 590/2018
1. This application is filed by Mr.Vivek Omprakash Abrol seeking stay of the operation of the order dated 19.03.2018 passed by this court in Co. Appl. 1377/2013.
2. It has been prayed in the application that the applicant is a bona fide purchaser of Flat No.302, Panchamrut Apartment, Versova, Andheri (W), Mumbai and has been enjoying peaceful possession of the flat since 2009 CO.PET. 265/1998 Page 1 of 10 consequent to an agreement to sell dated 12.10.2009 executed between the applicant and Mr.Suresh Grover. A consideration of Rs.64,10,000/- was also paid to Mr.Suresh Grover. The agreement was duly registered on 20.11.2009. It is also pleaded that before buying the aforenoted flat, the applicant had taken adequate precautions of scrutinizing various documents. The said Mr.Suresh Grover had submitted copies of the letters dated 16.12.2005 and 16.01.2016 issued by the OL informing the Secretary of the Panchamrut Group Housing Ltd. that this court was pleased to pass an order dated 12.05.2005 issuing a no objection certificate in favour of Mr.Suresh Grover regarding his claim on the flat. It has also been pleaded that pursuant to the execution of the transfer deed, the applicant has been regularly paying the Society maintenance charges, electricity charges and dues to Mahanagar Gas Ltd. It is pleaded that on 04.04.2018, a team from the office of the OL had tried to attach the said property and informed the tenant about the order of this court dated 19.03.2018. It is then that the applicant got information about the orders of this court. It is pleaded that the applicant is a bona fide purchaser of the flat.
3. I may note that the Official Liquidator attached to this court was appointed as a Provisional Liquidator on 05.06.1998 with the direction to take possession of the assets of the JVG Finance Ltd. The Company was ordered to be wound up by this court vide order dated 29.08.2003. The OL had tried to take possession of the flat in question but Mr.Suresh Kumar Grover had resisted stating that pursuant to an MOU entered into with the respondent Company, he had taken possession of the flat and that the respondent Company, namely, JVG Finance Ltd. had waived off its right, title and interest in the said flat.
CO.PET. 265/1998 Page 2 of 104. On 22.07.2004 this court had appointed Mr.G.P.Thareja as One Man Committee to look into the claims of various land/flat holders who had allegedly purchased land and property from JVG Finance Ltd. Mr.Suresh Grover filed his claim in respect of the said Flat. The claim was filed on 15.12.2005. The Committee had on 05.04.2006 rejected the claim of Mr.Suresh Grover. Thereafter, Mr.Suresh Grover filed an appeal being Co. A.(SB) No.39/2009 before this court. The appeal was dismissed on 09.10.2012. For one reason or the other, thereafter the possession of the flat could not be taken over by the OL. It is by order dated 19.03.2018 a direction was passed to the OL to take over the possession of the flat and seal the same. It is at this stage that the present application has been filed.
5. A perusal of the order passed by the Thareja Committee dated 05.04.2006 would show that predominantly the said Mr.Suresh Grover had relied upon a Memorandum of Understanding to claim title to the property. The Committee held that the said MOU confers no title. It also noted that the said document is purportedly executed on behalf of JVG Group of Companies. There is no seal of the respondent Company in the said document. It was noted that the claim of the said Mr.Suresh Grover cannot be recognised as there is no resolution of the Board of Directors of the respondent company permitting the sale or transfer of the title of the property in favour of Mr.Suresh Grover.
6. In appeal which was filed by Mr.Suresh Grover before this court the primary contention of Mr.Grover was that JVG Group of Companies through its director, namely, Mr. V.K.Sharma had entered into the MOU dated 30.05.1996 with Mr.Grover. Reliance was also placed on an agreement to sell dated 10.12.1997 which is said to have been entered into CO.PET. 265/1998 Page 3 of 10 between JVG Finance Ltd. and Mr.Suresh Grover. The order of this court dated 9.10.2012 also noted that Mr.Suresh Grover transferred the said flat in favour of his wife Ms.Priya Grover on 01.07.1998. The appeal was dismissed on 09.10.2012 holding that Mr. Suresh K.Grover has no title to the said flat. It is now that the applicant has filed this application claiming title of the flat based on the Registered agreement to sell and receipts, etc. dated 12.10.2009 to claim that he is a bona fide purchaser having purchased the said property of Mr. Grover. Reliance is placed on two communications allegedly issued by the OL on 16.12.2005 and 16.01.2006 and also on an order of this court dated 12.05.2005.
7. The order dated 12.05.2005 filed by the applicant allegedly passed by this court reads as follows:-
"C.A. No. 22/2005Perused the documents submitted by Mr.Suresh K.Grover in support of his claim regarding the flat No. 302, Panch Amrut, Panch Marg, Off. Yari Road, Versova, Andheri (West), Mumbai 400 064.
On verification of the document submitted by Mr.Grover, I found his claims are genuine and it deserve the no objection to be given in his favour.
Accordingly, I hereby direct the Official Liquidator to issue the no objection certificate in favour of Mr.Suresh K.Grover with regards to his claim over the flat No. 302, Panch Amrut Marg, Off. Yari Road, Versova, Andheri (West), Mumbai 400 0061.
Company Application stands disposed off."
8. On the last date of hearing, namely, 25.05.2018 this court after CO.PET. 265/1998 Page 4 of 10 perusing the record as available in the court had noted that there is no trace of the application-CA No. 22/2005 or the order of this court allegedly dated 12.05.2005 which is relied upon by the applicant. The Registry was directed to place on record a report as to whether such an application was filed or as to whether order dated 12.05.2005 was passed. The Registry has today placed a report stating that there is no application traceable being Co. Appl. 22/2005. The Report states as follows:-
"As per computer data and when searched manually no such CA as No.22/2005 is filed (sic)."
9. The copies of the two letters dated 16.12.2005 and 16.01.2006 allegedly written by the OL attached to this application reads as follows:-
"To The Secretary Panchamrut Group Housing Society Ltd. Off Yari Road, Versova, Andheri (West) Mumbai Sub: NOC for Flat No. 302, Panchamrut In the matter of M/s. JVG Finance Ltd., JVG Leasing ltd. & JVG Securities Ltd. (All under Liquidation).
Sir, Take note that with reference to our earlier communication in the above named subject, the documents submitted by the claimant Mr.Suresh K Grover have been found in order.
This office has „No Objection‟ to transfer the said premises, viz, Flat 302, Panchamrut only, in the name of Mr.Suresh K. Grover or his nominees/successors/heirs.
Yours faithfully, (R.K.Dalmia) CO.PET. 265/1998 Page 5 of 10 Asst. Official Liquidator Delhi"
"To The Chairman Panchamrut Group Housing Society Ltd. Off Yari Road, Versova, Andheri (West) Mumbai Sub: In the matter of M/s. JVG Finance Ltd., JVG Leasing ltd. & JVG Securities on Ling.
Sir, With reference to your letter date 27.12.2005, the Hon‟ble Court of Delhi pleased to pass an order dated 12.05.2005 regarding the issuing the no objection certificate in favour of Sh.Suresh K. Grover. A copy of order dated 12.05.2005 is enclosed herewith.
Yours faithfully, (R.K.Dalmia) Asst. Official Liquidator Delhi"
10. The applicant was on 25.5.2018 directed to produce the original letters dated 16.12.2005 and 16.01.2006 purportedly written by the OL. Today, learned counsel for the applicant submits that they do not possess the original letters dated 16.12.2005 and 16.01.2006 said to have been issued by the OL as the original would be available with the Society. He further submits that the Society has refused to cooperate in this regard with the applicant.
CO.PET. 265/1998 Page 6 of 1011. The OL has also filed a reply to the present application. The OL has made a categorical averment that a perusal of their record shows that there is no trace of the communications dated 16.12.2005 and 16.01.2006 purportedly written by the OL in their record.
12. Prima facie it appears that there has been a forgery committed by someone regarding the orders of this court dated 11.5.2005 and the application being allegedly CA No. 22/2005. There appears to be no order dated 12.05.2005 passed by this court. Even the authenticity of the documents allegedly written by the OL is doubtful. The said documents dated 16.12.2005 and 16.01.2006 cannot be relied upon.
13. I may also note the conduct of Mr.Grover in this regard. The admitted fact is that he had filed a claim petition before the Thareja Committee on 15.12.2005 which claim was rejected on 05.04.2006. He subsequently filed the appeal before this court on 28.10.2009. While the claim of Mr.Suresh Grover was being adjudicated by this court, he has on the basis of the documents which were prima facie forged has gone and sold off the property to the applicant purportedly by an agreement to sell dated 12.10.2009 and has handed over possession of the flat to the applicant for valuable consideration. Despite notices being sent to him, he has refused to appear before the court.
14. I may only note that before the Thareja Committee Mr. Grover had relied upon the MOU which was dated 30.05.1996 which was rejected by the Thareja Committee. However, before this court when the appeal was filed, Mr.Grover relied upon both the documents, namely, the MOU dated 30.05.1996 and the agreement to sell dated 10.12.1997 which are documents purportedly executed by the respondent Company in favour of Mr. Grover.
CO.PET. 265/1998 Page 7 of 10This court in the said order dated 09.10.2012 held as follows:-
"10. Record shows that the winding up petition against the Company JVG Finance Ltd. was preferred by the Reserve Bank of India on 04.6.1998.
11. Record also shows and it is an admitted fact that on 10.10.1997 the Reserve Bank of India had passed an order under Section 45 MB of the Act restraining V.K.Sharma and JVG Finance Limited from transferring its assets or properties or encumbering them in any manner. The agreement to sell dated 10.12.1997 which is of after the date of the restraint order dated 10.10.1997, apart from the fact that V.K.Sharma had disputed his signatures on the MOU and agreement to sell even otherwise did not confer authority upon V.K.Sharma to act on behalf of the company. There was also no Board Resolution forthcoming. The appellant also did not bother to check the Board Resolution. That apart, the unstamped MOU and unregistered MOU and agreement to sell not even bearing the seal of the company could not transfer any interest in an immovable property.
12. In AIR 1970 SC 1041 J.K.(Bombay) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s New Kaiser-I-Hind Spinning and Weaving Co. & Ors.(respondents) and M/s Juggilal Kamlapat Bankers, Kanpur and Others.(creditors) , the Apex Court had noted that once a winding up order has been passed no new rights can either be created and no uncompleted rights can be completed as these are the proceeds of the assets to be distributed amongst the creditors and workmen pari passu. The second agreement to sell dated 10.12.1997 vide which Suresh K. Grover had transferred flat No. 302 to his wife Priya Grover is also an invalid document; when Suresh Grover did not have any title to the property, the question of his transferring a better title to Priya Grover did not arise. The electricity bill in the name of Priya Grover will not establish title in her favour."CO.PET. 265/1998 Page 8 of 10
15. This court would remain bound by the findings recorded by this court on 09.10.2012 holding that Mr.Grover has no title to the property. Accordingly, Mr. Suresh Grover could not pass any valid title to the applicant. The Division Bench of this court in Girdhari Lal Tewari & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., 2003(70) DRJ 415, held as follows:
"11. .... It is an established principle of law that no person could give any better title than what he has and that when a person does not have any title he cannot transfer title and ownership of the land in question in favour of the transferee. ......"
16. Learned counsel for the applicant states that as a fraud has been committed, the appropriate forum to adjudicate this dispute especially the conduct of Mr.Grover would be a civil forum. He submits that he will be taking appropriate steps immediately in this regard.
17. The OL is directed to take steps to implement the order of this court dated 19.03.2018 and take possession of the flat. All conditions of the order dated 19.03.2018 shall be complied with.
18. The present application is without merit and is dismissed.
Co.Pet.265/199819. Today, I have dismissed the above application being CA No.590/2018. In the said application, the applicant has relied upon the order of this court dated 12.05.2005 allegedly issued in CA No.22/2005. I have recorded a finding above that prima facie the copy of the alleged order of this court that has been produced is a forged document.
20. Registrar Vigilance may conduct an inquiry into this prima facie act CO.PET. 265/1998 Page 9 of 10 of forgery and submit a report in this regard. Report may be submitted within six weeks from today.
JAYANT NATH, J.
JULY 05, 2018/rb corrected and released on 30.07.2018 CO.PET. 265/1998 Page 10 of 10