Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

M/S Kemtrode Pvt Ltd vs Recovery Officer Debt Recovery ... on 1 August, 2008

Author: N.Kumar

Bench: N.Kumar

IN 'THE HIGH COURT OF' KARHATAKA AT  . 

Datad this the 1*" day ofAugusf.,  '   %

BEFORE 

THE: tion*m.E MR. J'I}§»fI'ICV!'"}.1_*l"'i<iVIl\£.4§§"R_:  :2 V

vm: Pmiifion Ne.' 3749-wé%QQ'f%»£GM-$5913 
BETWEEN: "   %   %

ivijs Kemtrude PI'iv_atc__Ltd.<,  V' ' » _  - 
      A V  " 
Baxxgaioxwr: ---- 5t'_I"_'*»{} ("J'fi'5:__  _ '  __     v .
Rep: by its; F}ii*er:t¢_.:fvanr§'=. , 

Chief Executive..f:}fié:;:r 3  "

Mr. N31'. Sséifiasijan'   b
64 years "  % _ ' .
as/0 Mr, .¥\{,.J. Th%;a_nas. 

_. VNo.29':'-3?, V'~C113$s; i'I..Ma1'I1_

" iizsciiranagaag ii» Stagtz

I A ' ~ . 5Ba11:ga1uc»r¢3; ----V  {X38 . ; ; Petitioner

 ._   Sahasfian 8:. Associates, Advmam)

 Aim 

 .. VTTh¢Ré«covc1y Officar

V Eiflht Recovery Tribunal
 "--I'*EAé1d:-sun Circle
; Bangalom --~ 560 002

ARM Branch
II I Finer, Spence-r's Towers



86, MAC}. Road  »  -
Bangakzsre ---- S60 00 1  Respondexgm '

(By Sri M V Chandxashekara Raddy, Advc»c¥ai,€.---  _  u 

Sri Vfilgtdayakumar, Advbcaitr' f(}r--.R2;;« _   V .
Sri S V Bhai, Advocate for Imp}ea£ii1t.g ap.jpIi£:a;1:«l)"  :1

This Writ Petition is fiit'~:d.»iII1der Artgiéies 2.26  22??' of F

the Consfimiion of India, praying -.§:p"~~:;_11asI1 The 11Qfice'--.is.€>.i:cd far V
pmclamation of sale dated :2-2~20_()'E' _u13dé'-r _thc-:- ozgiginal of
A11:ut:xuz't:~L1 issumi in £)Cf}P Nu.1}3'?'iZ. in GA No.59;'-3&3??? pasewd
by the Recovexy fiDR'I', _B"'w;1ggv:_2c:e.1~e: i.e,, the first
Dcspondent 11éi'r:in.  '  F_  } IA   _

"I"his Writ    ._Qޣicrs this day, the
Court made ti1_e:+.i3:3-4IIc%§§{i.}_3.g:v  _    f. V

' ..............Y ,...--.................

The jséfifiopef'  ";3g£;f;ft$ITB€i this writ petition seeking

_ writ of i'.b1f_VV:;:1i1a53I:r1i:1g the sale pmclamafion issued on

 "i"«3;1vc first respondcnt-Recovexy Oficer bringing

   for the: for the allegbd dues which he owes

Z  in  

A   \'   The petitioner is 3 pzivatc ljnnited company. He

V    financial facility from the ascend mspondcnt Bank,
  When he committed default, the Bank ixiifiatxzd proceedings

under the provision of the Reoovery of Debts flue to Banks

 



V'  mean while, matter is iisted for final beauty' g,

Rscovrzxy Gficer bringing the pci:ific>ncr"s 

weaver 8! sum of Rs.3,18,43,34€}]~. Aggrieved byifie   

ptztitioner is before this Court,   ~

3, This Court after  tlig:-,1 

grantad zixiterim czrdcr of stay  "fizz?" a, of
eight weeks, The said     be tzxtendcd fmm
time to time. By    pelmitted the:

petifiwrmcr to fi4_1d..,Va  'fififféeccfld I'€3I3"311'35nt'

Bank to Qoxasigiér 'pa:-tifiiéner sympathetically and
to pass Vsuiizabisv  ' petitioner also undertgok to

deposit.   interest fur the delayed period,

_ Pendi;1g'€:onsidc14éxtj(§:1i ofithe mpmsentation of the pefifioncr,

 girder dated 10.01.2008 directed the petitioner to

ciVAc3L~;;{1:c§;:~.-.T:i_t   also. It is subxnittcd that the afaresaici

  amm.£n.i__; of -» is deposited on 08,()2.2GO8, The fate
--. .¢;$i"*§1¢ 1"'3i)li7'§?§§€I1f£1'i:i0}Z1 made by the petitioner is not knuwn, at

V'   it has not been infoimed to the pefifionczr. Eowcver,

'V.

 



4. The learneé Counsel appearing fer

submits thai the benefit. of one fime settlement  [tee  l 

the petitioner on his depositing a  91' 'fivslxlfl-:  
March 2005. in the letter, it wee   the
schedule was not adhered to by'   :15: be ll
entitled to the benefit  he wedltie  tel:-A  enfire
amount due under the   the petitioner
did not pay the emeuat  he has lost
his right lmcie-.6" " is liable to pay the

entire am_m_u1t_.A  l M

,.-4.»

-3.  in «appféeiate the aforesaid contention, it is
necessary Ai0__l4Gr_}k facts of this case. The Bank

 -V  '  {(3 recover 3. 311311 of

 ll§sr'A2,i;:Z2;'9€3';;ZZ?if:{~. Alltefeontest, the applicafion was allewed.

'll'l::1__e" * ll under the award was a sum of

l   R3,$;J,_$,4r2,:3?lG3--£5  Before the said amt:-mtlt coulé be recovered,

 RBI "e2§.u1e up with a scheme fer one tixae settlement";

   the Bank infoxmeé the petitioner that he {ran take

 _.._lV'aéidvl.¥.f111tage 0f the said scheme and that the said scheme will be

M/,



 

«$3

is delay Gf aboui 22 mcmths in maialng tha fiaid 

Bank ihaugh rccsived the Demand Drafi,     

the pmpérrty 01" tha petifioner for sake.   
6,

This Cburt has stayed the V 's'a i@'  'as:

aforesaid; dirtzcted the pefifi9ner'i:0«._pay #'§'i'SI'ilB.VOf  *

being the interest': péyabic on Rs.é¥{i  ¢ _ 
71 On literal  ii:-f L'3_chemeg"tiih Bank is

justified in its contention that enfifled to the

benefit Qfienc 'ti111::§'v's*.%,=;?£3ii:e§*:1Ii:é::;§;:VV$a:%1:*1e'111c and he has lost his right

as he did }1Ii§f..14('i'C}'){.#.§2'ft"Vi'}.]!1iEfifilley "within tim stipulated time,

_.. But fh.t*§;f€~'i{:i,~  ::';_1aiA,'s:0fa1 amount due by the gsetitioner to

 vaxzzxmld Rs.3,2£),OO,G00/ --. Uncier the scheme.

  was made, Imown that if he pays

  would ciose the accmlnt, it is clear that film

"  to receive Rafi-{E lakhs and give a qtlietus B) the
  as they Wili net be able to I'€:C{)V61" the money from the
  fiefitioner. Even flilti'. said amount of R340 iakhs the pefitiancr

 ééas not able to pay within the stipulated time. 8:11;, the said

\w/



G')

amouni is paid after a deiagr cf 22 manths. Having  to

the facts 0:" this case, it wcvuid be highiy unIeas011_:;['b'le.e';;:§j:  _

of the Bank to contend that because he did not  u .e 

within the stipuiateei time, he has 

against one time settlement of 33.40   '¢{2'Iie:1 'a

there is default, 'the petitioner  fer
the cielay in payment efiihe  to 55* Ijeid. It is
open to the Bank ti)  :1niéaeei12iE}.1e'_'_j11terest or the

current i:m:erest_  =-the Adeizfiyi  or such other

amounts whiehV.A::jae3.?:':  for delay in payment.
But tee ineist ".21:   extending the benefit in the

facts and ci1;e'a1,pVi1,2:.taiieeV$'.;5'i' case would be highly arbitrary

 ,    eimumstances, I am satisfied that the

V g::2et:ifie fi'er iis. efititled to the refief sought fer subject to the

 "  cfiixdifiensvvio be imposeci under this order:

%   'gag writ petition is allowed.

(b) 3713 impugned safe notice is hereby quashed; l

 



(C) 'f'he respondent-Brmlxt is direded to 

Rs.-40 Zakhs paid by the Rs;5,5G,000/- which 23 " " 2 order af this Cauri, mwareils Em;-en= ~ :3 AA (cl) It is open to the fitsisi ef interest and other wiiic'i'a~.. théy have inetzmrefi from ':§f}"efii:g the one time settimzyeng 3 payment they iii;-;_': the petitioner has am:1:'Eing the ioa..1'1fm';iiity. mg; wig efgcafciéje Se done within a period cf 5 ihree date of receipi ofthis «order. %/ ' fl "1"! Judge