Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

31. Also important are the circumstances surrounding the invocation of the shares pledged on 21.08.2018. A perusal of the communication exchanged between the parties reveals that originally on 22.05.2020, when the respondent realised that certain loan facilities under FA-1&2 as assigned to them by the original lender on 11.06.2018 and 27.12.2019 had remained unpaid, it intended to invoke only the shares pledged vide the unattested pledge agreement dated 27.12.2019. Nowhere in the Invocation of Pledge Notice dated 22.05.2020 did the respondent contemplate invoking the shares pledged on 21.08.2018. This continued to be the position till 05.06.2020 when the respondent, in response to the borrower's request for release of the shares pledged on 21.08.2018, suddenly expressed its intent to withhold these shares. Evidently, the decision to invoke the shares pledged on 21.08.2018 was a mere afterthought, a last-ditch effort on the respondent's part to secure the monies it had lent to the borrower. If the respondent was of the opinion that it was permitted to invoke any pledge agreement to secure the loans advanced under any facility agreements, executed in the past, present or future, then it would have certainly been aware of this position on 22.05.2020 when it sent its Invocation of Pledge Notice. This, in turn, would have found a mention in the invocation itself, much prior to its communication dated 05.06.2020. In fact, even earlier, on 12.02.2020, when the respondent had first sent an email detailing the particulars of the outstanding liabilities owed by the borrower under FA-1&2, it expressly set out all the shares pledged to secure this liability in Annexure I therein. It is pertinent to note that even this list does not contain any mention or reference to the shares pledged by the petitioners on 21.08.2018 under FA-3.