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

2005 Supreme(Bom) 464

P.V.KAKADE, R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR
KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD. – Appellant
Versus
NOBILETTO FINLEASE AND INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. – Respondent


Judgment

R. M. S. KHANDEPARKAR, J.

( 1 ) HEARD. Rule. By consent, the rule is made returnable forthwith.

( 2 ) THE petitioner seeks to quash the complaint dated 6-11-2004 stated to have been filed by the respondent No. 1 with the respondent No. 2 and further, for the direction to restrain the respondent No. 2 from carrying out the investigation in relation to the said complaint.

( 3 ) IT is the case of the petitioner that in the course of its regular business, it had sanctioned loan to the respondent No. 1 and accordingly had disbursed an amount of Rs. 1,45,00,000/- in terms of the loan agreement dated 15-9-2000. Having obtained the said loan, the respondent No. 1 issued three post-dated cheques - one dated 1-7-2002 towards the repayment of the principal amount of rs. 1,45,00,000/- and the remaining two dated 15-9-2001 - one for a sum of rs. 18,09,600/- towards the interest payable upto 15-9-2001 and another for rs. 14,32,807/- towards the interest payable for the period from 15-9-2001 to 30-6-2002. The cheques towards the interest payment were issued after deduction of the tax at source. The respondent No. 1 also deposited the shares of various companies by way of pledge in pursuan















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