Karnataka High Court
Official Liquidator Of vs M/S Stovekraft Pvt Ltd on 30 November, 2022
Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
COMPANY APPLICATION NO.38 OF 2022
IN
COMPANY PETITION NO.148 OF 2015
BETWEEN
OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR OF
M/S MAGNUM INTERGRAFIKS PVT. LTD.,
(IN LIQN), ATTACHED TO
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CORPORATE BHAVAN,
NO 26-27, 12TH FLOOR,
RAHEJA TOWERS, M.G. ROAD,
BANGALORE -560 001
...APPLICANT
(BY SRI.SAGAR G.NAHAR, ADVOCATE)
AND
M/S STOVEKRAFT PVT. LTD.,
HAROHALLI INDUSTRIAL AREA,
KANAKAPURA
KARNATAKA -562 112
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.JAGADEESHGOUD PATIL, ADVOCATE)
THIS COMPANY APPLICATION IS FILED UNDER ORDER XI
RULES 6 & 9 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, PRAYING
TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO ANSWER ALL THE
INTERROGATORIES ABOVE MENTIONED, AND PRODUCE THE
DOCUMENTS SOUGHT FOR, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.
THIS COMPANY APPLICATION COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
2
ORDER
1. Company application No.38 of 2022 is filed by the applicant, who is the respondent in C.A. No.297 of 2021, seeking certain details and documents by way of interrogatories for the purpose of enabling the applicant to file written statement / objections to C.A. No.297 of 2021 filed by the Official Liquidator. The Interrogatories sought by the applicant in C.A. No.38 of 2022 are as under:
"INTERROGATORIES ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT FOR EXAMINATION OF THE APPLICANT
1. Which is the Agreement executed between the Applicant and the Respondent for the purpose of the alleged business transactions? Furnish the copy of the said agreement, if any.
2. Which are the purchase orders/invoices/ acknowledgments, out of which the alleged claim of Rs.40,77,594/- (Rupees Forty Lakhs Seventy Seven Thousand Five Ninety Four) arises? Furnish the copies of the said documents, if any.3
3. Is there any balance confirmation done by the Respondent, with the Applicant, in relation to the alleged outstanding amount of Rs.40,77,594/- (Rupees Forty Lakhs Seventy Seven Thousand Five Ninety Four)?
4. Furnish the copy of the agreement/clause pertaining to charge of interest, if any.
It is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent to answer all the interrogatories above mentioned, and produce the documents sought for, in the interest of justice and equity."
2. The Official Liquidator has filed objections to the said application by specifically contending that the said interrogatories are not relevant or material for the purpose of the issue in controversy between the parties and setting forth other contentions, as to why the applicant is not entitled to the details and documents requested by him.
3. In the Statement of Objections filed by the Official Liquidator, it is stated as under:
4"OBJECTIONS TO INTERROGATORIES BY ANSWER FILED BY THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR UNDER ORDER XI RULE 6 & 9 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1908 That the Official Liquidator attached to this Hon'ble Court is the Liquidator of M/s.Magnum Intergrafiks Private Limited (in liqn) (herein after referred as company in liquidation) most respectfully submits as under to the interrogatories by Stove Kraft, the Applicant:-
1. I object to answer the interrogatories numbered 1 to 4 on the ground that these documents exclusively constitute the evidence of the Respondent's case, and the same is being sought for to escape the liability i.e the debt to be paid and defeat the ends of justice.
2. The interrogatories submitted by the Applicant, M/s.
Stove kraft Pvt. Ltd. is premature and not sufficiently relevant at the present stage of the suit. The Applicant is not supposed to fish out the evidence of the Respondent. The Applicant is attempting to escape the liability in the garb of interrogatories.
3. I object to answer the interrogatory number 1 on the ground that Stove Kraft, the Applicant herein, is trying to collect the evidence and is making a fishing and roving enquiry. Agreement entered between the 5 Applicant, Stove Kraft and the Respondent for the purpose of business transactions is one of the crucial documents in proving the debt and the Applicant instead of contesting the case is trying to extract evidence by way of interrogatories. It is submitted that demand notices were sent to the sundry debtors by the Office of Official Liquidator on behalf of Magnum Intergrafiks Private Limited and the Applicant, Stove kraft, Instead of admitting or denying his liability had sought for the details of the Ex-Director who had claimed Stove kraft to be its trade debtor. The Applicant, Stove Kraft has to either admit or deny his liability and file his reply instead of delivering Interrogatories which are for the purpose of extracting evidence.
4. I object to answer the interrogatory number 2 on the ground that it is irrelevant at the present stage and is also an attempt to compel M/s. Magnum Intergrafiks Private Limited, the Company in Liquidation, the Respondent herein, to disclose the evidence at a premature stage. The purchase orders / Invoices / acknowledgments and ledger statements must also be in the possession of the Applicant and the Applicant by way of Interrogatory is trying to contest his case based on the evidence of the Respondent which he has sought for under the garb of Interrogatories.
65. That with regard to interrogatory number 3, the balance confirmation which the Applicant is seeking for, must be in his possession as well and the amount of claim sought by this Office is a matter to be decided and adjudicated upon by the Court based on the evidence. In G.M. Pens International Limited vs Ramesh Kumar Jain 2009 (41) PTC 591 (Mad) it was held that "It is a trite that a party is not entitled to serve the Interrogatories with a view to collect materials which would constitute the evidence of the opposite party. This provision is not a short cut for a party to win the case. It is also not a short cut method to prove the cases of the party, who intends to deliver the interrogatories."
6. That the Company Application No. 297 / 2021 filed by the Official Liquidator along with the Statement of Affairs, Statement of Accounts and Ledger Statement maintained by the Company In Liquidation clearly discloses the nature of the case l.e., Recovery of Amount due to the Company (in Liquidation) towards publication of the Advertisement. In G. Nanchil Kumaran vs Govindasamy Reddiar (1999) 3 MLJ 660 it has been held that "No doubt, it is true that every party to a suit is entitled to know the nature of his opponent's case so that he may know beforehand what case he has to meet at the hearing. The nature 7 of a plaintiff's case is disclosed in his plaint. The nature of the defendant's case is disclosed in his written statement. If the plaint and written statement would sufficiently disclose the nature of the respective parties' case, then the party may not be permitted to administer the Interrogatories in writing to the other through the court." The nature of the case has been sufficiently disclosed in the Company Application No. 297/2021 and the Interrogatories sought are nothing but evidence.
7. The Applicant, Stove Kraft, has nowhere denied the existence of liability and is just trying to evade the liability in the garb of Interrogatories. The Interrogatories sought by the Applicant must also be in their possession as they are also a party to the agreement and they have nowhere denied their liability and the Applicant is also supposed to be in possession of Invoices, purchase orders and acknowledgments. Thus, the questions sought by the Applicant is premature, not relevant and is an attempt to fish out the evidence of the Respondent.
8. That the documents in possession of the Official Liquidator Includes Statement of Affairs, Statement of Accounts and Ledger Statement and this Office is yet to receive all the documents and the required documents that are in custody of this Office have 8 been filed along with the Company Application which pretty much discloses the nature of the case and the liability of the Applicant Company, Stove kraft and is sufficient to proceed at the present stage.
PRAYER The Official Liquidator therefore most respectfully prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased: -
a) To dismiss the interrogatory application filed by the Applicant, Stove Kraft on the ground that it is irrelevant at the present stage and the Interrogatories sought for, constitute the evidence of the Respondent's case.
And
b) To pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
4. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned counsel for the respondent and perused the materials on record.
5. A perusal of the application filed by the applicant in C.A. No.38 of 2022 will indicate that though the same is filed by 9 invoking the under Order XI Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, but the same is in the nature of seeking the particulars as contemplated under Order VI Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
6. However, in view of the specific stance of the Official Liquidator that it is not in a position to provide the said particulars and documents and that the applicant is not entitled to request the same by way of interrogatories, without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the rival contentions and reserving liberty in favour of the applicant in C.A. No.38 of 2022 to request the Court to draw inference / adverse inference against the Official Liquidator in this regard and, leaving open all rival contentions, C.A. No.38 of 2022 is disposed off.
SD/-
JUDGE RK CT:AN