Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: negative injunction in Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd vs Unity Infraprojects Ltd And 2 Ors on 6 July, 2015Matching Fragments
Presently, what is proposed in the CDR Scheme is that there would be a consolidated hypothecation deed and charge over the current assets of the 1st Respondent in place of these individual deeds, in favour of the CDR lenders. In other words, there is merely a restructuring of the existing charge in favour of the CDR lenders. No doubt there is an increased exposure to the extent of fresh Rupees 341 crores to be infused by the CDR 10/25 arbp 800-2014.doc lenders as part of the CDR Scheme. But that is something which is really to get the Respondent company out of the present debt trap and to revive it, and that is being closely monitored by a mechanism put in place by the Reserve Bank of India. In the premises, as long as the Petitioner's first pari passu charge is being recognized by the CDR lenders, the Petitioner cannot make any serious grievance out of the CDR scheme or its proposal of a consolidated hypothecation deed. As and when the security is realized, the Petitioner as the first pari passu charge holder will be entitled to participate in it. There is no case, thus, for granting any injunction by way of enforcement of the negative covenant claimed by the Petitioner.