2008 (3) TMI 469 - SC - Companies Law

Special Court - Jurisdiction and powers in civil matters - Held that - After taking into account the decretal amount as amended, together with interest as directed by the Special Judge in his order dated 8-6-1995 in M.P. 43/1995, the appellant is directed to pay the balance decretal amount within 30-6-2008, in three equal instalments commencing from the month of April, 2008. The first of such instalments shall be paid by 15-4-2008, and the next two instalments by 15-5-2008 and 30-6-2008. The last instalment shall include any broken amount left over after payment of the first two instalments. The hearing of the garnishee notices before the Special Court, Mumbai, shall remain stayed till the said date, and in case of default of such payment being made, this order will cease to be operative and the order appealed against will stand revived.

Issues:
1. Challenge to the order passed by the Special Judge under the Special Courts Act.
2. Execution of a decree against a judgment debtor.
3. Imposition of punishment for disobedience of court orders.
4. Correction of the principal amount mentioned in the decree.
5. Payment of decretal amount in instalments.

Issue 1: Challenge to the order passed by the Special Judge under the Special Courts Act:
The appeal challenged the order passed by the Special Judge under the Special Courts Act, where the conduct of the appellant was found to create difficulties in passing and executing the decree. The appellant, through Milan Dalal, was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment and pay a fine, which was suspended pending appeal to the Supreme Court.

Issue 2: Execution of a decree against a judgment debtor:
The decree was passed against the judgment debtor, M/s. Neeldeep Investment Company, for recovery of a substantial amount owed to the Notified Party, Bhupen Dalal. The appellant disclosed liabilities owed by the judgment debtor to various parties and garnishee notices were issued based on this information. The Special Judge restrained the judgment debtor from disposing of properties and ultimately sentenced the noticee for disobedience of court orders.

Issue 3: Imposition of punishment for disobedience of court orders:
The noticee was found to repeatedly create obstacles in the passing and execution of the decree, leading to the imposition of a 3-month simple imprisonment and a fine. The appellant made an offer to pay the decretal amount in instalments, which was accepted by the Custodian, subject to the appellant fulfilling the payment terms.

Issue 4: Correction of the principal amount mentioned in the decree:
An application was filed to correct the principal amount mentioned in the decree as two separate decrees were passed against the judgment debtor. The Court allowed the application, amending the decretal amount to be paid by the appellant after considering the total principal amount and interest decreed by the Special Judge.

Issue 5: Payment of decretal amount in instalments:
The appellant was directed to pay the corrected decretal amount in three equal instalments starting from April 2008. Failure to make the payments would result in the order becoming inoperative, and the original order would stand revived. The hearing of garnishee notices was stayed until the payment deadline, with no order as to costs.

This comprehensive analysis covers the various issues involved in the legal judgment delivered by the Supreme Court of India, addressing the challenges, execution of the decree, punishment for disobedience, correction of the principal amount, and the payment terms set for the appellant.

← Previous Next →