SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1998 Supreme(SC) 114

BATRA FINANCE (P) LTD. – Appellant
Versus
CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION – Respondent


( 1 ) LEAVE granted.

( 2 ). Heard learned counsel for the parties.

( 3 ) CONSIDERING the facts of the case and considering the facts that both the Appellate Authority and the revisional authority did not order for forfeiture but granted time to make payment, we do not think that it was a fit case where the direction for forfeiture should have been passed by the High court with liberty to file application for reallotment. Considering the fact that the interest on unpaid amount has been calculated on the basis of graduated interest from 12% to 24% and penalty on the first instalment has also been calculated at Rs 31,400 and penalty for the second instalment has been calculated at Rs 83,912 and also considering the fact that the appellant has already deposited a sum of Rs 24,90,000 in the Registry of this Court, we feel that the appellant does not deserve an order of forfeiture. The respondents are entitled to withdraw the said sum of Rs 24,90,000 with interest accrued thereon and give a detailed amount to the appellant within a month from today about the exact amount which was outstanding on the date of depositing the said sum of Rs 24,90,000. If any amount is still due from the appe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top