Calcutta High Court
L & T Finance Limited vs Apl Metals Limited & Ors on 14 June, 2017
Author: Arijit Banerjee
Bench: Arijit Banerjee
ORDER SHEET
A. P. No. 441 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
IN THE MATTER OF:
L & T FINANCE LIMITED
Versus
APL METALS LIMITED & ORS.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE
Date : 14th June, 2017.
Appearance:
Mr. Paritosh Sinha, Adv.
Mr. Loknath Chatterjee, Adv.
Mr. Debayan Sen, Adv.
For the petitioner
Mr. Gopal Pahari, Adv.
Mr. Susmita Mahata, Adv.
For the respondent no. 1
The Court : Affidavit of service in Court be kept on record. In view of averments made in paragraph 67 of the petition, leave is granted under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent.
The contention of the petitioner is that out of a loan amount of Rs. 26 crores advanced by the petitioner to the respondent no 1, a sum of approximately Rs. 23.5 crores is presently due and payable by the respondent no. 1 to the petitioner.
There is an arbitration agreement between the petitioner and the respondent no. 1 and the petitioner has approached this Court under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for interim protection.
2
Learned counsel for the respondents strongly disputes the claim made by the petitioner. According to him, nothing is due and payable by the respondents to the petitioner and on the contrary huge sums are payable by the petitioner to the respondents. However, admittedly the respondents have not filed any proceeding before any legal forum for recovery of their alleged dues from the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner produces a copy of an affidavit affirmed on behalf of the respondent no. 1 in connection with Commercial Arbitration Petition (L) no. 163 of 2017 initiated by the petitioner against the respondents in the Bombay High Court, wherein the respondent no. 1 admitted that the payment outstanding to the petitioner was to the tune of Rs. 14.59 crores and that the respondent company has already paid Rs. 1.18 crores. The respondent company further offered to liquidate the balance outstanding at the rate of Rs. 30 lakhs per month.
In view of the aforesaid and having heard learned counsel for the parties, by way of an interim measure, I pass an order in terms of prayer (I) of the petition. This order shall remain in force for six weeks from date or until further order whichever is earlier.
I further deem it appropriate to appoint receivers for the purpose of inventorising the assets which are claimed to be the security of the petitioner company. Mr. Sunil Kumar Pan, Advocate, Bar Association, Room No. 2, High Court, Calcutta is appointed as receiver for the purpose of inventorising the assets indicated against serial nos. 1, 2, 3, 10 and 11 in the schedule being Annexure Q to the petition. The said assets are all within the state of West Bengal.
3
Mr. Krishna Nanda Mukherjee, Advocate, Bar Association, Room No. 11, High Court, Calcutta is also appointed as receiver for the purpose of inventorising the assets indicated against serial nos. 4 to 9 in the schedule being Annexure Q to the petition. The said assets are all outside the State of West Bengal.
It is made clear that the receivers shall not in any way interfere with possession of any party who might be found at the said properties and shall only prepare an inventory of the said properties. The receivers shall be entitled to an initial remuneration of 3000 Gms each to be paid by the petitioner at the first instance. The receivers shall file their respective reports in this Court on or before 14th July, 2017.
Let the matter be listed under the heading new motion before the regular Bench on 18th July, 2017.
(ARIJIT BANERJEE, J.) A Dey AR(CR)