9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 469X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g 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. - CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1528 OF 2005 - - - Dated:- 13-3-2008 - C.K. THAKKER AND ALTAMAS KABIR, JJ. L. Nageshwar Rao, S.R. Mishra, Shailendra Narayan Singh and Vimla Chandra S. Dave for the Appellant. Subramonium Prasad for the Respondent. JUDGMENT Altamas Kabir, J. This appeal has been filed under section 10 of the Special Courts (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992, challenging the order passed by the learned Special Judge on 12-1-2005 in Show-Cause ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s." 3. In order to appreciate the circumstances in which the aforesaid order came to be passed, the facts leading to the filing of the Civil Appeal in this Court are briefly set out hereunder. 4. Bhupen Dalal, the father of the noticee Milan Dalal, was declared to be a Notified Party under the provisions of the Special Courts (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992, hereinafter referred to as the 1992 Act . The Custodian under the said Act filed Miscellaneous Petition No. 43 of 1995 on behalf of the Notified Party, Bhupen Dalal for recovery of 1,42,65,000 with interest from M/s. Neeldeep Investment Company Private Limited, the appellant herein. On 8-6-1995 the Special Court passed a decree on that petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /s. Lighthouse Investments Limited, (2) Oceanic Investments Limited, (3) Kalpvruksha Holdings and Investments Co. Pvt. Ltd., (4) Harisharan Developers Private Limited, (5) M/s. S. Ramdas and (6) M/s. Anmol Chemicals (Guj.) Limited. 7. On the basis of the information disclosed by the noticee in his said affidavit on 15-12-1999, the Custodian took out garnishee notices. Pursuant to notice to the garnishees they appeared and filed affidavits and the common defence taken was that though they admittedly owed amounts to the judgment debtor, the said amounts were adjusted on acceptance of shares of different companies by the judgment debtor towards repayment of the dues. At that stage the Special Court passed order dated 19-9-2003 where refere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted that as far as contempt proceedings are concerned, his client is willing to accept the offer of the appellant but submits that this should not in any way affect the ultimate liability of the appellant to pay the decretal amount. In this view of the matter we adjourn the passing of the order on the basis of the consent as arrived at between the parties, till 3rd April, 2006 when the petitioner will bring the first instalment of the amount to Court. In the event the payment of all the instalments is made as aforesaid, this appeal will stand allowed and the order of the High Court will stand set aside and the garnishee notice will be discharged. In default of payment of any one instalment or any portion thereof, the appeal will ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r modification of the order passed in this appeal on 20-1-2006. In the said application, it was clarified that two separate decrees were passed by the Special Court against the respondent No. 1, one was for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,42,65,000 with interest at the rate of 24 per cent per annum from the date of receipt of amount till payment and the other for a sum of Rs. 32,14,500 with interest at the rate of 15 per cent per annum from the date of receipt of the amount till payment. Despite the fact that two decrees had been passed for a total sum of Rs. 1,74,79,500 in the decree the sum of Rs. 1,42,65,000 was mentioned together with interest. It has been stated in the application that the total principal amount should be mentioned as Rs. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5,75,000 which has already been recovered by the Custodian. 16. 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 bein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
