Delhi High Court - Orders
Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd vs Kadam Developers Private Limited & Ors on 16 April, 2021
Author: Vipin Sanghi
Bench: Vipin Sanghi, Rekha Palli
$~11, 12, 22 & 23
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ FAO(OS) (COMM) 59/2021
INDIABULLS HOUSING FINANCE LTD ..... Appellant
Through Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Manish Jha, Advocate
Ms. Vishrutyi Sahni, Advocate
Mr. Saurabh Seth, Advocate
versus
KADAM DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.
..... Respondents
Through Mr. Gopal Jain, Sr. Adv. with Ms.
Gauri Rishi, Ms. Srishti Juneja and
Ms. Nikhar Luthra, Advs. for R-1 to
R-4.
(12)
+ FAO(OS) (COMM) 60/2021
INDIABULLS HOUSING FINANCE LTD ..... Appellant
Through Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Manish Jha, Advocate
Ms. Vishrutyi Sahni, Advocate
Mr. Saurabh Seth, Advocate
versus
SHIPRA LEASING PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Manav Gupta, Adv. with Mr.
Sahil Garg, Ms. Esha Dutta, Ms.
Srishti Juneja and Mr. Sanampreet
Singh, Advs. for R-1 to 4.
(22)
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:AWANISH
CHANDRA MISHRA
Signing Date:17.04.2021
14:30:28
+ FAO(OS) (COMM) 61/2021 & CM APPLs. 14767 to 14770/2021
INDIABULLS HOUSING FINANCE LTD ..... Appellant
Through Mr. Sandeep sethi, Sr. Adv. with
Mr. Rishi agrawala, Adv.
Mr. Karan luthra, Adv.
Mr. Ankit banati, Adv.
versus
SHIPRA HOTELS LTD. & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Manav Gupta, Adv. with Mr.
Sahil Garg, Ms. Esha Dutta, Ms.
Srishti Juneja and Mr. Sanampreet
Singh, Advs. for R-1 to 4.
(23)
+ FAO(OS) (COMM) 62/2021 & CM APPLs. 14777 to 14780/2021
INDIABULLS HOUSING FINANCE LTD ..... Appellant
Through Mr. Sandeep sethi, Sr. Adv. with
Mr. Rishi agrawala, Adv.
Mr. Karan luthra, Adv.
Mr. Ankit banati, Adv.
versus
SHIPRA ESTATE LIMITED & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Manav Gupta, Adv. with Mr.
Sahil Garg, Ms. Esha Dutta, Ms.
Srishti Juneja and Mr. Sanampreet
Singh, Advs. for R-1 to 4.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI
ORDER
% 16.04.2021 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AWANISH CHANDRA MISHRA Signing Date:17.04.2021 14:30:28 FAO(OS) (COMM) 61/2021 & FAO(OS) (COMM) 62/2021
1. These two appeals have been mentioned before us for urgent listing on the ground that the Bench of Hon'ble the Chief Justice has not assembled today and out of the four similar appeals preferred by the appellants, two are listed before this Court being FAO(OS) (COMM) 59/2021 and FAO(OS) (COMM) 60/2021. It is, therefore, requested that the four appeals be listed before this Court and heard simultaneously.
2. The request is allowed. The Registry is directed to list FAO(OS) (COMM) 61/2021 & FAO(OS) (COMM) 62/2021 before this Court.
CM APPL. 14726/2021 (Exemption) in FAO(OS) (COMM) 59/2021, CM APPL. 14728/2021 (Exemption) in FAO(OS) (COMM) 60/2021, CM APPL. 14768/2021 to 14770/2021 (Exemptions) in FAO(OS) (COMM) 61/2021 and CM APPL. 14777/2021 to 14780/2021 (Exemptions) in FAO(OS) (COMM) 62/2021
3. Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
4. The above mentioned seven applications stand disposed of. FAO(OS) (COMM) 59/2021 & CM APPL. 14725/2021 (stay), FAO(OS) (COMM) 60/2021 & CM APPL. 14727/2021 (stay), FAO(OS) (COMM) 61/2021 & CM APPL. 14767/2021 (stay), FAO(OS) (COMM) 62/2021 & CM APPL. 14777/2021 (stay)
5. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by Ms. Srishti Juneja on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 4 in Item no. 11, i.e., FAO(OS) (COMM) 59/2021, and by Mr. Manav Gupta on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 4 in the three remaining appeals.
6. These four appeals are directed against similar orders passed by the learned Single Judge in the four petitions preferred by the respondents under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. In all these appeals, Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AWANISH CHANDRA MISHRA Signing Date:17.04.2021 14:30:28 there are two impugned orders which are dated 26.03.2021 and 08.04.2021. We are informed that although on 08.04.2021, the matter was adjourned to 12.04.2021, it was not taken up on that date and was instead adjourned to 20.04.2021. A grievance is made in that regard as well by Mr. Rajiv Nayar, learned senior counsel for the appellant in FAO(OS) (COMM) 59/2021.
7. We find that the order dated 26.03.2021, which restrains the appellant from invoking the shares pledged in its favour by the respondents/borrowers and by which the appellant is aggrieved, neither records any plea raised by any of the parties nor any prima facie findings in favour of the respondents/the applicants. It is being argued by the appellant that it had sanctioned loans to the tune of INR 2801 crores in favour of the respondents collectively under 16 loan agreements, out of which it is stated that INR 1995.37 crores have been disbursed to the borrowers. The loans were secured by way of inter alia mortgage of several immovable properties and pledge of equity shares by the shareholders of four companies namely (i) M/s. Shipra Leasing Private Limited (ii) M/s. Shipra Estate Limited (iii) M/s. Shipra Hotels Limited and (iv) M/s. Kadam Developers Private Limited, who are the respondents in these four appeals. The loans were, however, only advanced to three of these companies, being (i) M/s. Shipra Leasing Private Limited (ii) M/s. Shipra Estate Limited and (iii) M/s. Shipra Hotels Limited.
8. We have heard the submissions of learned senior counsel for both sides for some time. We are of the view that it was obligatory for the learned Single Judge, while passing the order restraining the lenders/lessees from invoking the pledge of shares, to return at least a prima facie finding and provide some reason as to why the invocation of the pledge deserved to Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AWANISH CHANDRA MISHRA Signing Date:17.04.2021 14:30:28 be interdicted by way of an interim measure. Unfortunately, there are no reasons forthcoming in the impugned order dated 26.03.2021 which, therefore, continues to operate as on date.
9. Though our attention has been drawn to several documents and pleadings, particularly by the learned senior counsel for the appellant, we refrain from referring to them lest it prejudice the interests of any of the parties before the learned Single Judge. After all, the Section 9 petitions are still pending consideration and, we are informed that they are now coming up before the learned Single Judge on 20.04.2021. We are, therefore, inclined to suspend the operation of the order dated 26.03.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in the four OMPs in question.
10. Mr. Gopal Jain, learned senior counsel for the respondent in FAO(OS) (COMM) 59/2021 then expresses an apprehension that the suspension of the said impugned order would mean that the appellant would be free to invoke the pledge of shares which would irreparably prejudice the interest of the respondents. In response, learned counsels for the appellant have submitted before us that the invocation of the pledge of shares will be undertaken in a completely transparent manner, on a fair evaluation of the shares and that the same would also be placed before the learned Single Judge. Needless to say, since the lis between the parties is pending before the learned Single Judge, such invocation of the pledge would obviously be open to challenge before the Court.
11. We, therefore, suspend the operation of the orders dated 26.03.2021 and 08.04.2021 passed in the aforesaid OMPs, till further orders. We request the learned Single Judge to pass reasoned orders on merits, without, in any way, being influenced by the order that we have passed today Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AWANISH CHANDRA MISHRA Signing Date:17.04.2021 14:30:28 suspending the operation of the impugned orders. On the next date, neither party shall seek an adjournment before the learned Single Judge.
12. List on 27.05.2021.
VIPIN SANGHI, J REKHA PALLI, J APRIL 16, 2021 acm Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AWANISH CHANDRA MISHRA Signing Date:17.04.2021 14:30:28