9911796707
TMI Blog1982 (4) TMI 250X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd., a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at No. 12A, Camac Street, Flat No. 2B, Calcutta-17 (hereinafter referred to as "the company"). According to the petition, the agreed rate of interest was 18% per annum. In order to secure the repayment of the loan of Rs. 45,000, the company along with the then board of directors of the company, namely, Meghraj Berlia, Mohit Kumar Berlia, Lalit Kumar Berlia, Amit Kumar Berlia and Sujit Kumar Berlia along with Kamal Kumar Khaitan and Smt. Kamala Khaitan, executed a hundi and/or promissory note for Rs. 45,000 on May 15, 1981. It is the case of the petitioner that the money still remains unpaid in spite of the service of the statutory notice under section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entioned against Sl. No. 3 in the aforesaid minutes, is the petitioner before me. My attention was also drawn to Ex. C to the petition which is a letter dated September 25, 1981, from the company signed by its director, Mohit Berlia, to the petitioner. It records "Our hundi No. 44, dated May 5, 1981, for Rs. 45,000 taken as loan". The letter states that the company could not honour the hundi in the stipulated time due to paucity of funds. The letter, however, contains an assurance that the entire sum will be paid within November 10, 1981. It is also stated in the letter that several resolutions regarding the above matter had been passed at the board meetings of the company and certified copies of the extract of the minutes of those board ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by one of the directors of the company, Sri Lalit Kumar Berlia, were sent to the said lenders through peon as well as by registered post with acknowledgment due." The chairman requested the board to confirm the following which were unanimously adopted by the board. That the letters, as mentioned above, written by the company to Mrs. Mithu Chakrabarti, Mr. A. R. De, Mr. Shanti Kant Jhinghan & Mr. N. N. Chakrabarti, signed by Sri Lalit Kumar Berlia, be and are hereby cancelled. That the payment of interest on the said borrowings at 18% per annum accrued up to September 15, 1981, be paid on or before September 30, 1981, to each lender of money, as mentioned above, by Account Payee Banker's Pay Orders in favour of each : "That the overdue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount due to the petitioner in full and as such the question of further payment does not arise. Mr. Mookherjee, appearing for the petitioner, emphatically stated before me that all the documents of the company, portions whereof have been extracted above, fully corroborate the case of the petitioner in every detail. He also pointed out the fact that the reply to the statutory notice contains clearly inconsistent statements and is completely contrary to the records of the company which have been extracted above. Mr. P. K. Das, appearing on behalf of the company, drew my attention to the affidavit-in-opposition which has been affirmed by Mohit Kumar Berlia on January 25, 1982. In my view parts of this affidavit are not only inconsistent with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ued thereon to the said petitioner." As correctly pointed out by Mr. S. B. Mookherjee, the pleading of this agreement, which I have just now extracted immediately above, is an improvement on the reply to the statutory notice where no such agreement is pleaded at all. Mr. P. K. Das also sought to contend that the hundis have not been properly stamped and as such they cannot be enforced in law. The hundis have been produced before me at the hearing and they appear to be properly stamped. Even if they were not, there would not be difficulty, in my view, in the way of the petitioner relying on the hundis. This is because of the well-settled proposition that although a particular instrument may not be enforceable by reason of insufficient stam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... B Harish Mookherjee Road, Calcutta-25, the sum of Rs. 45,675 (Rupees forty-five thousand six hundred and seventy-five only) in full and final settlement of the loan taken along with interest accrued till date." It is clear from the receipt that the signatures of Mr. A. Chakraborti and the body of the receipt has been written by two different hands and in two different kinds of ink. In the affidavit-in-reply it has been stated that the receipt is a manufactured document. It is on record that Mr. A. Chakraborti, whose full name is Ashoke Chakraborti, was the managing director of the company and he sent his resignation letter on May 14, 1981, which was accepted by the company at its board meeting on May 18, 1981. After a close examination of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
