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 6]

Bombay High Court

Afzal Khan vs Shemaroo Entertainment Ltd. (Formerly ... on 3 September, 2018

Author: A.S. Oka

Bench: A.S. Oka

DSS                                   1              25-nmal-768-18 in appl-349-18.doc

                   FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
               ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                NOTICE OFMOTION (L) NO. 768 OF 2018 
                                  IN 
                     APPEAL (L) NO. 349 OF 2018 
                                  IN
                       PETITION NO. 14 OF 2017
                              Afzal Khan 
                                  vs.
                      Shemaroo Entertainment Ltd.

Office Notes, Office Memorandam
of Coram, appearances, Court's 
                                                Court's or Judge's orders
orders or directions  and 
Registrar's orders
Mr. Mayur Khandeparkar a/w. Mr. Gauraj Shah I/b Tejas Shah for the
Applicant.
Mr.   Guarang   Mehta   a/w.   Ms   R.   Shah   I/b   Ms   Dipal   Mehta   for   the
Respondent.
Mr. Jayant Gaikwad for the Creditor. 
Mr. E.B. Shivakumar, Deputy Official Assignee is present.

                            CORAM :         A.S. OKA  AND  M. S. SONAK, JJ.
                            DATE :          3rd SEPTEMBER 2018.

                            P.C. :
                             
                            1]       Heard   the   learned   counsel   appearing   for
                            the applicant. 


                            2]       In the notice of motion, there is a prayer

for condonation of delay of 162 days. After having perused the affidavit in support of the notice of motion, we find that very reckless and irresponsible allegations have been made by the applicant against his own advocate without impleading the concerned advocate as a party. DSS 2 25-nmal-768-18 in appl-349-18.doc Even in the memorandum of appeal, there are serious allegations made against the advocate, who represented the applicant before the learned Single Judge.

3] The learned counsel appearing for the applicant states that the applicant will come out with the application for amendment of the memorandum of appeal and the applicant will file one more affidavit in support of the notice of motion after withdrawing the allegations against the advocate.

4] He states that the well-wishers of the applicant are willing to pay a sum of Rs.40 Lakhs to the petitioning creditor, who has agreed to accept the same in full and final settlement. He also states that the well-wishers are agreeable to pay an amount Rs.40 Lakhs provided that the impugned order is set aside. However, we find that in the impugned order, a finding has been recorded by the learned Single Judge that the balance amount payable by the applicant/appellant under the decree on admission is Rs.71,85,579/- with interest at the rate of 13% per annum on the sum of Rs.70,79,675/- from 11th February 2017 until the payment. The contention of the applicant is that this finding is factually incorrect. DSS 3 25-nmal-768-18 in appl-349-18.doc 4] The learned counsel appearing for the petitioning creditor submits that the said finding is correct.

5] Considering the averments made in the affidavit in support of the notice of motion and the grounds taken in the memorandum of appeal, as of today, no case is made out for grant of any ad-interim relief. We grant liberty to the applicant to move the Court as and when the application for amendment and the additional affidavit are ready.

                                    (M. S. SONAK, J.)                    (A. S. OKA, J.)
                 Digitally signed
      Dinesh     by Dinesh
      Sadanand   Sadanand Sherla
                 Date: 2018.09.06
      Sherla     11:42:44 +0530