Delhi High Court - Orders
In The Matter Of Royal Airways Ltd. ... vs Unknown on 8 May, 2023
Author: Sanjeev Narula
Bench: Sanjeev Narula
$~C-24
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CO.PET. 385/2003
IN THE MATTER OF ROYAL AIRWAYS LTD. (FORMERLY
KNOWN AS MODILUFT LTD.) ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Hrishikesh Baruah, Ms. Apoorva
Jain, Mr. Kumar Kshitij and
Mr. Anurag Mishra, Advocates.
Mr. Atul Sharma and Mr. Abhinav
Sharma, Advocates for Petitioner.
Mr. Ajeet Shukla, Mr. Tarang Gupta
and Mr. Kartikeya Sharma,
Advocates for R-2 to 4.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
ORDER
% 08.05.2023 CO.APPL. 282/2023 (on behalf of the R-1 to place on record the Settlement Agreement dated 06.04.2023 and for withdrawal of the sum Rs. 3.5 crores along with the accrued interest lying deposited with the Registrar General, Hon'ble High Court of Delhi)
1. Hindusthan Engineering Private limited, Respondent No. 1, has entered into a Settlement Agreement dated 06th April, 2023 with Paradise Credits Private Limited, Kesha Investment Pvt. Ltd. and Modi Overseas Investments Ltd, being Respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4, respectively [hereinafter "Settlement Agreement"]. In terms of the said agreement, instant application to seeks withdrawal of the sum of Rs. 3.5 crores along with accrued interest, deposited with the Registrar General of this Court.
2. Mr. Ajeet Shukla along with Mr. Tarang Gupta, counsels representing Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 confirm the Settlement Agreement and state that Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:10.05.2023 17:54:53 they have no objection to the prayer made in the application.
3. Mr. Atul Sharma, counsel representing the Petitioner (now known as SpiceJet Ltd.), states that the amount sought to be withdrawn, was deposited pursuant to the Scheme of Compromise being sanctioned by this Court vide order dated 15th July, 2005. As a part of the scheme, the Respondent No. 1 was also required to withdraw the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [hereinafter 'the Act']. Subsequently, criminal proceedings were also initiated by Respondent No. 1 which are the subject matter of the Criminal Revision No. 134/2021. Mr. Sharma states that Respondent No. 1, should also ensure withdrawal of the aforesaid legal proceedings.
4. Mr. Hrishikesh Baruah, counsel for the Applicant, states that the following proceedings under Section 138 of the Act, have been withdrawn:
SN CASE NO. PENDING BEFORE TITLE OF CASE
1. Case 19th Metropolitan Hindusthan Engineering
0040503/2015 Magistrate Court and Industries Limited
Calcutta Vs. Modiluft
2. C/25/1997 16th Metropolitan Hindusthan Engineering
Magistrate Court, and Industries Limited
Calcutta Vs. Modiluft
3. C/26/1997 16th Metropolitan Hindusthan Engineering
Magistrate Court, and Industries Limited
Calcutta Vs. Modiluft
5. He states that the orders passed by the Court allowing the withdrawal request are not available but this fact is implied by the communication dated 02nd May, 2023 received by the Applicant from their counsel, copy whereof is handed across the board and is taken on record.
6. In respect of Criminal Revision Petition 134/2021 pending before the Patiala House Court, Mr. Baruah undertakes to the Court that the same shall be withdrawn within one week from today. As regards Criminal Revision Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:10.05.2023 17:54:53 No. 49/2021, Mr. Baruah states that, in the event the aggrieved person initiates an action for quashing of said proceedings, Respondent No. 1 shall have no objection and undertakes to extend full cooperation. All of the above statements made by Mr. Baruah are taken on record and shall bind the Applicant.
7. For the sake of record, it must be noted that there are proceedings before the Supreme Court of India (Criminal Appeal No. 1645-1647/2015) which arise from the aforenoted proceedings under Section 138 of the Act. In any event, since the said proceedings under Section 138 itself have been withdrawn, the proceedings arising therefrom, would be rendered infructuous. Thus, parties shall be at liberty to approach respective Courts for appropriate orders. With that being the position, the prayer made in the application is allowed with the following directions:
7.1. Settlement Agreement is taken on record. 7.2. Applicant is permitted to withdraw the amount of Rs. 3.5 crores along with accrued interest thereon.
7.3. Registry is directed to expedite the disbursal of claim.
8. Disposed of.CO.PET. 385/2003
9. The file be consigned to the record room.
SANJEEV NARULA, J MAY 8, 2023 nk Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:10.05.2023 17:54:53