2007 Supreme(AP) 788
Andhra Pradesh High Court
ANUPAMA HOMES INDIA PVT. LTD - Appellant
Versus
P. SHOURI RAJA P. LOURDU RAJA - Respondent
Decided On : 08/10/2007
Advocates Appeared :
C.V.MOHAN REDDY, D.PRAKASH REDDY, S.Ravi
Headnote:
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Order 40, Rule 1 – Negotiable Instruments Act – Section 138 – Civil miscellaneous appeal – Petition filed by the defendants 2 and 4 under Order 40, Rule 1 C. P. C. and appointed as receiver to take possession of the properties of Homes Private Limited, preserve them till the disposal of the suit and allow the conduct of the company affairs in accordance with the arrangements made in as reiterated in appellant is the plaintiff and the respondents 1 to 4 herein are the defendants 1 to 4 - Originally, the suit was filed on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, West and South, Ranga Reddy District, said suit came to be transferred from the file of the Principal junior Civil Judge, West and South Reddy District, to the file of I additional Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad, to be tried along with as per the Order passed in, and renumbered –Held, cheques referred in notices finding place in the Memorandum of Understanding course, it is the contention of the respondents 1 and 2 that they were made to sign on blank papers under coercion and duress and made muse of the said blank signed papers by putting something in his favour and filed before various authorities is a matter to be enquired into at the trial material brought on record clearly established that the respondents 1 and 2 entered into an agreement with regard to sale of their shares in the appellant/company and received the amounts by way of cheques. Consequent on the dishonour of the cheques, proceedings have been initiated against P. Jayaprasada Raja for the offence under Section 138 of the negotiable Instruments Act. Even the said criminal proceedings are stated to have been withdrawn by the respondents 1 and 2 herein. Court do not want to dilate much as to what made the respondents 1 and 2 for withdrawing the criminal cases – Appeal is allowed.
( 2 ) THE appellant is the plaintiff and the respondents 1 to 4 herein are the defendants 1 to 4 in O. S. No. 2218 of 2005 on the file of II Additional Chief judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Originally, the suit was filed on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, West and South, Ranga Reddy District, as O. S. No. 194 of 2003. The said suit came to be transferred from the file of the Principal junior Civil Judge, West and South, Ranga Reddy District, to the file of I additional Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad, to be tried along with O. S. No. 693 of 2003 as per the Order dated 03. 08. 2005 passed in c. R. P. No. 1481 of 2005, and renumbered as O. S. No. 2218 of 2005.
( 3 ) THE plaintiff is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. It is engaged in the real estate business. The plaintiff represented by its managing Director-P. Jaya Prasad Raja filed the suit-OS. No. 2218 of 2005 (old o. S. No. 194 of 2003) for perpetual injunction against the defendants restraining them, their henchmen and agents etc. from interfering with its peaceful possession and enjoyment of the properties, more fully described in the suit schedules A to C. A-Schedule property admeasuring Ac. 5. 35 guntas comprising survey Nos. 455/p, 456, 460/1 and 2, situated at Poppalguda village, rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District; B-schedule property admeasuring ac. 3. 15 guntas comprising Survey No. 91 Part, situated at Nanakramguda village, seri Lingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District; and C-schedule property admeasuring Ac. 9. 09 guntas comprising Survey Nos. 116, 118, 119, 120, 129 P of manikonda Jagir village and Survey Nos. 5, 6, 7 and 8 of Pokalwada village, rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. It is averred in the plaint that the defendants resigned from the Board of Directors of the plaintiff company on 08. 02. 2003 and thereby the defendants ceasedto be the members of the Board of directors of the plaintiff-company with effect from 08. 02. 2003. The plaintiff filed. A. No. 452 of 2003 seeking for temporary injunction. The said. A. came to be dismissed on 04. 04. 2003. The plaintiff assailed the order dated 04. 04. 2003 passed in. A. No. 452 of 2003 by filing an appeal being C. M. A. No. 98 of 2003 on the file of V Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy district. The said appeal came to be dismissed on 07. 02. 2005. The plaintiff assailed the judgment passed in C. M. A. No. 98 of 2003 by filing CRP NO. 1481 of 2005 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The said C. R. P. came to be disposed of on 03. 08. 2005 with certain directions. The operative portion of the said order reads as under:
"inasmuch as the controversy in this CRP also is in relation to the management and administration of the assets of the petitioner company, this Court is of the view that the same arrangement needs to be ensured. Further, to avoid confliciting judgments, both the suits need to be heard by the same. The parties agree for transfer of OS No. 194 of 2003. Once the suit is transferred, the arrangement that was ordered in the earlier CRP would hold good for the purpose of both the suits. Hence, the CRP is disposed of directing that: a) The O. S. No. 194 of 2003, on the file of Principal Junior Civ