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 1, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Sh. Siddhartha Tytler vs Sh. Jagdish Tytler on 8 August, 2024

Author: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

Bench: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

                                    $~24
                                    *           IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                    +           CS(OS) 721/2023
                                                SH. SIDDHARTHA TYTLER                        .....Plaintiff
                                                             Through: Mr. Anupam Srivastava and Mr.
                                                                      Vasuh Misra, Advocates

                                                                                      versus

                                                SH. JAGDISH TYTLER                                                                 .....Defendant
                                                              Through:                                         Mr. Chetan     Sharma, Advocate
                                                                                                               (Through VC)

                                    CORAM:
                                    HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
                                                      ORDER

% 08.08.2024 I.A. 22170/2023 (Under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2)

1. This is an application filed by the plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC').

2. It is contended by the plaintiff that the plaintiff herein has advanced a sum of Rs. 13.50 crores to the defendant through bank transfers. It is stated that the transfers were affected in three separate branches on 19.08.2021, 08.09.2021 and 18.09.2021. The bank statement evidencing the said transfers between the parties has been placed on record.

3. Learned counsel for the plaintiff has also handed over the written statement served upon him by the defendant wherein the receipt of Rs. 13.50 crores is not disputed by the defendant. In the written statement, the defendant is, however, stated that the said amount of Rs. 13.50 crores was not a loan amount but was in fact a transfer of sale proceeds pertaining to CS(OS) 721/2023 Page 1 of 3 This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/08/2024 at 02:27:42 sale of an immovable property i.e., F-8, Pushpanjali, Ansal Farms, Bijwasan, New Delhi. He states that the said contention is wholly unsupported by any documents on record. He states in fact no documents have been served by the defendant along with the written statement.

3.1. He states, on the other hand, the plaintiff herein has duly disclosed this loan transaction between the parties in his balance-sheet filed with the Income Tax Department.

3.2. He states that to the knowledge of the Plaintiff herein, the only movable and immovable assets available with the defendant is the shares held by defendant in "M/s Sumanav Exports Pvt. Ltd." and property bearing no. "C-8, First Floor, Paschimi Marg, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi" owned by the said company. He states that the defendant herein holds 99% shares in that company. He states that the defendant controls the said company and he, therefore, be restrained from selling the shares of the company or facilitating the sale of C-8, First Floor, Paschimi Marg, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi.

4. This Court has considered the submissions of the plaintiff and perused the record.

5. The documents filed by the plaintiff show admitted bank transfer of Rs. 13.50 crores by the plaintiff to the defendant. The plaintiff has declared the said transaction as a loan in its balance sheet filed before the Income Tax Department. The receipt of the said amount of Rs. 13.50 crores is admitted in the written statement; however, the defendant has sought to plead a distinct transaction of sale of an immovable property as a justification for receipt of the amount of Rs. 13.50 crores without filing any supporting documents in support of the alleged distinct sale transaction. Upon CS(OS) 721/2023 Page 2 of 3 This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/08/2024 at 02:27:42 consideration of the documents and the facts pleaded by the parties, this Court is prima facie satisfied that the plaintiff has Rs. 13.50 crores as a loan to the defendant.

5.1. The defendant in its reply to this application has stated that he is not attempting to sell the shares held in "M/s Sumanav Exports Pvt. Ltd." or the property bearing no. "C-8, First Floor, Paschimi Marg, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi".

5.2. In these facts, to balance the interest of the parties, until the next date of hearing, the defendant is hereby restrained from transferring or creating third party rights in his shareholding in "M/s Sumanav Exports Pvt. Ltd." or in any manner facilitating the sale property bearing no. "C-8, First Floor, Paschimi Marg, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi", which is owned by "M/s Sumanav Exports Pvt. Ltd.".

6. The defendant is directed to ensure that his pleadings are on record before the next date of hearing.

7. List on 15.10.2024.

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J AUGUST 8, 2024/rhc/MG CS(OS) 721/2023 Page 3 of 3 This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/08/2024 at 02:27:43