9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (2) TMI 1260X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is pertinent to mention that by the order dated 13-3-2008, this Court had issued a sale proclamation for Ghaziabad property of respondent-company-in-liquidation as well as for plant and machinery installed in the said premises. The sale was to be conducted on 29-5-2008. 3. However, before the sale could be conducted, two applications being Company Application Nos. 562-563/2008 were filed by Mr. Vinod Kumar Jain, ex-director of the company-in-liquidation. After hearing the learned counsel for applicant as well as learned counsel for Official Liquidator, this Court recalled the sale proclamation upon certain conditions. The order dated 27-5-2008 is reproduced hereineblow : "I have heard learned counsel for the applicant/ex-management and Mr. Luthra on behalf of the O.L. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the order dated 13-3-2008 had been passed in chambers without notice or information to the ex-management. By that order sale proclamation had been issued for 29-5-2008. The applicant came to know of the same upon noticing the proclamation as published in the newspapers. Mr. Rawal, learned senior counsel argues that till date the liability of the compa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order dated 27-5-2008. By the same application, Mr. Jain also asked for refund of the amount of Rs. 25 lakhs along with interest. 7. Upon a reading of the order dated 27-5-2008 ( supra ), I am of the considered opinion that the sale proclamation was recalled on the false and misleading statement of Mr. Vinod Kumar Jain that there was no ascertained claim leave alone debt of the Punjab and Sind Bank. 8. Further, the order was recalled subject to Mr. Vinod Kumar Jain depositing not only Rs. 2 lakhs towards expenses incurred in publication but also depositing an amount of Rs. 1.5 crores within two months. Admittedly, since the deposit of Rs. 1.5 crores has not been made within the stipulated time and as Mr. Vinod Kumar Jain has already filed an application that he is unable to deposit the said amount, I am of the considered opinion that the order dated 27-5-2008 needs to be recalled forthwith. Accordingly, it is so ordered. 9. Mr. Pallav Saxena, learned counsel for Punjab and Sind Bank states that though the Bank is outside the process of winding up yet the Bank is willing to render all co-operation for sale of Ghaziabad property as well as fixed assets of the company in l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2008, Mr. Vinod Kumar Jain has advisedly and correctly used the expression that no ascertained amount was claimed or due and payable to the Punjab and Sind Bank as no decree has been passed till date. 16. However, I am not impressed by the argument advanced by Mr. Rawal as I am of the prima facie view that Mr. Vinod Kumar Jain has deliberately made false and misleading averments in paragraphs 5, 6 and 10 of Company Application No. 562/2008 which have been reproduced hereinabove. In fact, from the said averments as well as from the submissions recorded by this Court on 27-5-2008, an impression was conveyed to this Court that neither any ascertained claim leave alone any determined amount is due or payable by the respondent company to Punjab and Sind Bank. 17. I am of the prima facie opinion that Mr. Vinod Kumar Jain by making false, misleading and mischievous statements and submissions before this Court has interfered with and/or attempted to interfere with the administration of justice and has also prejudiced the due course of judicial proceedings. 18. The falsity of the averments and submissions that neither any ascertained amount had been claimed nor any ascertain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 19th April, 1996 passed by the AAIFR, Mr. Vinod Kumar Jain again admitted indebtness of respondent company towards the Bank to the extent of Rs. 12.68 crores. The relevant portion of the said writ petition is reproduced hereinbelow : "8. It is submitted that the Punjab and Sind Bank has filed suits in Delhi High Court against the company for Rs. 12.68 crores in the year 1986. ****** 11. That in these circumstances, when the petitioner company, its shareholders, State of U.P., New Bank of India other creditors were ready and willing to put the Industrial Unit into production merely on the rigid attitude by the Punjab Sind Bank and that too when the petitioner company was ready and willing to pay the suit amount , the order passed by AAIFR and BIFR are contrary to the essence and spirit of the aim and object which have been sought to be achieved enacting Sick Industrial Act, 1985." [Emphasis supplied] (C) Mr. Vinod Kumar Jain admitted indebtness of company in liquidation towards Punjab and Sind Bank for the suit amount of Rs. 12.68 crores in para 7 of the additional objections dated 17-1-2010 filed in the present Company Petition No. 115/1991. The said paragraph ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the same interferes with the administration of justice. Such persons are required to be properly dealt with, not only to punish them for the wrong done, but also to deter others from indulging in similar acts which shake the faith of people in the system of administration of justice. " [Emphasis supplied] 21. In Dhananjay Sharma v. State of Haryana [1995] 3 SCC 757 the Apex Court has observed as under : "38. ... ... ... Thus, any conduct which has the tendency to interfere with the administration of justice or the due course of judicial proceedings amounts to the commission of criminal contempt. The swearing of false affidavits in judicial proceedings not only has the tendency of causing obstruction in the due course of judicial proceedings but has also the tendency to impede, obstruct and interfere with the administration of justice. The filing of false affidavits in judicial proceedings in any court of law exposes the intention of the concerned party in perverting the course of justice. The due process of law cannot be permitted to be slighted nor the majesty of law be made a mockery by such acts or conduct on the part of the parties to the litigation or even while ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filing application being Co. Appl. 562/2008 interfered with and/or attempted to interfere with the administration of justice as well as prejudiced the due course of judicial proceeding in the present case. By his conduct, Mr. Vinod Kumar Jain has also scandalized and/or attempted to scandalize as well as lower the reputation of this Court. 24. Accordingly, I suo motu issue criminal contempt notice to Mr. Vinod Kumar Jain under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Registry is directed to open a separate file. 25. Mr. Praveen Kumar, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of Mr. Vinod Kumar Jain. He prays for and is granted eight weeks time to file a reply affidavit. 26. Since the contempt proceedings have been initiated consequent to the facts brought on record by the Punjab and Sind Bank, the said Bank is granted liberty to file a rejoinder-affidavit, if any, before the next date of hearing. 27. A copy of Company Application No. 562/2008 as well as a copy of the present application along with all annexures shall be placed in the new file. 28. Registry is directed to list the matter before appropriate Bench according to the roster on 23-8-2011. 29. With the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
