2021 (4) TMI 1369 - HC - Indian Laws

Restraining the appellant from invoking the shares pledged in its favour by the respondents/borrowers - HELD THAT - It was obligatory for the learned Single Judge, while passing the order restraining the lenders/lessees from invoking the pledge of shares, to return at least a prima facie finding and provide some reason as to why the invocation of the pledge deserved to be interdicted by way of an interim measure. Unfortunately, there are no reasons forthcoming in the impugned order dated 26.03.2021 which, therefore, continues to operate as on date. The operation of the orders dated 26.03.2021 and 08.04.2021 passed in the aforesaid OMPs, suspended till further orders - List on 27.05.2021.

Summary

Issues: Urgent listing of appeals, Exemption applications, Stay applications, Prima facie findings in orders, Suspension of orders, Invocation of pledge of shares, Request for reasoned orders

In the present judgment, the issues revolve around the urgent listing of appeals, exemption applications, stay applications, the absence of prima facie findings in orders, suspension of orders, invocation of pledge of shares, and the request for reasoned orders.

Starting with the urgent listing of appeals, the court allowed the request to list four appeals simultaneously due to the non-assembly of the Chief Justice's bench. The Registry was directed to list the appeals before the Court.

Regarding exemption applications, the court allowed exemptions in various applications, subject to all just exceptions, leading to the disposal of the mentioned applications.

Moving on to the stay applications, issue notices were issued, and the court was informed that the appeals were directed against orders passed under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The court noted the absence of prima facie findings in the orders restraining the invocation of pledged shares, expressing the need for reasons to justify such restraints.

The court, after hearing submissions from both sides, suspended the operation of the orders dated 26.03.2021 and 08.04.2021, emphasizing the necessity for reasoned orders on merits by the Single Judge without influence from the suspension order.

Concerning the invocation of the pledge of shares, the court addressed the apprehension raised by the respondent regarding potential prejudice. The appellant assured transparent invocation procedures, subject to challenge before the Court, emphasizing fair evaluation and compliance with the Single Judge's review.

In conclusion, the court suspended the impugned orders and requested reasoned orders on merits without adjournments on the next date, listing the matter for further proceedings on 27.05.2021.