Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
The Union Of India vs Shyam Bihari Gupta on 11 December, 2018
Bench: Sangeet Lodha, Dinesh Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1753/2018
1. Union Of India, Through The Director, Ministry Of
Corporate Affairs, Serious Fraud Investigation Office,
Second Floor, Pandit Deendayal Antyoday Bhawan, CGO
Complex, New Delhi-110 003.
2. The Deputy Director, Government Of India, Ministry Of
Corporate Affairs, Serious Fraud Investigation Office,
Second Floor, Pandit Deendayal Antyoday Bhawan, CGO
Complex, New Dlehi- (110 003)
----Appellants
Versus
M/s Riddhi Sidhi Infraproject Pvt. Ltd., Corporation Tower, RSG's
The University Campus, Hiran Magri Extension, Opposite Sector-
9, Udaipur (Raj.) Through its Director, Mr. Saurabh Tak S/o Sh.
Mahendra Kumar, By Caste Tak, Aged About 34 Years, R/o 71,
Shastri Nagar, Sirohi, Rajasthan.
----Respondent
Connected with
D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1754/2018
1. The Union Of India, Through The Director , Ministry Of
Corporate Affairs, Serious Fraud Investigation Office,
Second Floor, Pt. Deen Dayal Antyodaye Bhawan, Cgo
Complex , New Delhi -110003
2. The Deputy Director, Government Of India, Ministry Of
Corporate Affairs, Serious Fraud Investigation Office,
Second Floor, Pandit Deendayal Antyodaye Bhawan, Cgo
Complex, New Delhi, (110 003)
----Appellants
Versus
1. Megha Chauhan D/o Sh. Ashok Kumar Chouhan, Aged
About 33 Years, R/o Near Old Bus Stand, Tehsil Rohat,
District Pali.
2. Indu Tak D/o Kanhaiya Lal Tak, Aged About 57 Years,
Resident Of 71, Shanti Nagar, Sirohi.
3. Mahendra Kumar Tak S/o Ram Pratap Tak,, Aged About
63 Years, Resident Of 71 Shanti Nagar, Sirohi.
(2 of 5) [SAW-1753/2018]
4. The Union Bank Of India, Through Branch Manager,
Branch-Delhi Gate, Udaipur.
5. The Adarsh Cooperative Bank, Main Branch-Sirohi.
----Respondents
Connected with
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1755/2018
1. The Union Of India, Through The Director, Ministry Of
Corporate Affairs, Serious Fraud Investigation Office,
Second Floor, Pandit Deen Dayal Antyodaye Bhawan,
Cgo Complex, New Delhi- 110003.
2. The Deputy Director, Government Of India, Ministry Of
Corporate Affairs, Serious Fraud Investigation Office,
Second Floor, Pandit Deen Dayal Antyodaye Bhawan,
Cgo Complex, New Delhi- 110003.
----Appellants
Versus
Shyam Bihari Gupta S/o Sh. Harish Chandra Gupta, Aged
About 51 Years, 424, Panch Ratna Complex, Udaipur
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sanjeet Purohit.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Neeraj Jain.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA Judgment 11/12/2018 These appeals are directed against the interim order dated 02.11.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in SB Civil Writ Petitions No.12046/2018, No.12328/2018 & No.13112/2018, which reads as under :
"After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties for considerable time, this Court deems it proper to list the matter on 16.11.2018 with a clear direction to the respondents to come out with (3 of 5) [SAW-1753/2018] complete record and reasons for arriving at the opinion resulting into the impugned order as well as stage and status of investigation which has already taken place against the petitioners. Learned ASG Mr.Sanjeet Purohit shall be required to satisfy this Court with the help of complete record as well as any pleadings which he feels to file for this purpose. Learned ASG Mr.Purohit shall be required to get the record from the Ministry of Corporate Affairs as well as the respondents.
.........x x x x x........
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties on this issue, this Court observes that a modus operandi has been laid down by the Tribunal with the participation of the respondents and by taking their affidavits and their submissions on record. The Tribunal has recorded that the respondents have no objection to the suggestion made at paras no.10 and 11 of the reply affidavit filed before the Tribunal. In light of the aforementioned submission and for the limited period until next date, the petitioner shall be permitted to conduct their day to day business in terms of the aforesaid order dated 4.10.2018 and the same shall be applicable to the present petitioners and the present respondents also. Both the parties shall be required to abide by the same terms as prescribed by the Tribunal"
Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the respondents have questioned the legality of the order passed by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, however, Ministry of Corporate Affairs has not been impleaded as party respondent in the writ petition. It is submitted that as a matter of fact the writ petition preferred by the respondents without impleading Ministry of Corporate Affairs as party respondent is liable to be dismissed for non-impleadment of necessary party. Regarding the second part of the order of the learned Single Judge permitting the respondent to conduct his day to day business in terms of the order dated 04.10.2018 passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (NCLAT) in the cases of other companies, learned counsel submitted that the order passed by the NCLAT is not subject matter of the writ petition preferred by (4 of 5) [SAW-1753/2018] the respondents. That apart, the matter is pending before the NCLAT and it is always open for the respondent-Company to make an appropriate application for the interim relief or modification of earlier order, if any. Thus, the learned Single Judge has erred in passing the interim order as aforesaid in the writ petitions preferred by the respondents where challenge was confined to the validity of the order dated 20.06.2018 passed by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondents Mr. Neeraj Jain submits that the respondent-Company has already made an application before the NCLAT for modification of the order passed in the pending appeal and, therefore, the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge permitting the respondent-Company to conduct their day to day business in terms of order dated 4.10.2018 passed by the NCLAT in the matters of other companies may be set aside. Learned counsel further submitted that the respondent-Company has already made an application for impleading Ministry of Corporate Affairs as party respondent in the writ petition before the learned Single Judge. It is submitted that on the application being allowed and Ministry of Corporate Affairs being impleaded as party respondent in the writ petition, the respondent-Company shall be making an appropriate application before the learned Single Judge for appropriate relief and, therefore, the respondent-Company has no objection if the order passed by the learned Single Judge directing the respondents to produce the record is also set aside.
Accordingly, the impugned interim order dated 02.11.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge, as indicated above, is set aside.
(5 of 5) [SAW-1753/2018] The respondent-Company shall be at liberty to pursue its application preferred before the NCLAT for modification of the order. It will be open for the NCLAT to consider the application of the respondent-Company uninfluenced the proceedings pending before the Court.
The matter with regard to the requisition of the record of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, if any, can always be looked into by the learned Single Judge once the Ministry of Corporate Affairs is impleaded as party respondent.
The appeals stand disposed of accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J (SANGEET LODHA),J
38-AArora/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)