Back
KRISHNA RAO
Frostees Export (India) Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Sabri Properties Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff's claim for damages and investment. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. defense challenges based on jurisdiction and specific relief act. (Para 3) |
| 3. court affirms jurisdiction and challenges to suit are unfounded. (Para 4) |
| 4. determination that mortgage and understandings were valid. (Para 5 , 7) |
| 5. allegation of fraud and misuse of corporate veil. (Para 6) |
| 6. court's analysis of jurisdiction and maintainability. (Para 8) |
| 7. judgment granting damages and costs. (Para 9) |
| 8. final order directing payment and terms of enforcement. (Para 10) |
JUDGMENT :
Krishna Rao, J.
1. The plaintiff has filed the suit against the defendants for decree a sum of Rs. 2,71,21,096/-, damages of Rs. 300 crores, decree for Rs.10 lacs and interest thereon.
2. CASE OF THE PLAINTIFF :
a. The plaintiff has applied for dealership of Hyundai Motors India at Howrah. The plaintiff has received a Letter of Intent from Hyundai Motor India Limited offering the plaintiff to establish a dealership at Howrah for sale of passenger range of cars and to provide after sales services and sale of genuine spares for such cars. As per Letter of Intent, 6000 sq.ft. of space required for showroom and about 12000 sq.ft. of space for
Fraud claims are not within the jurisdiction of the Debt Recovery Tribunal, allowing civil suits to proceed despite jurisdictional bars under the RDDBFI Act.
The Court established that the plaintiffs, as financiers, were entitled to recover the principal sum and interest from the defendants, and the interest rate was limited to 9% per annum as per the Mon....
Civil Courts retain jurisdiction to hear suits alleging fraud against secured creditors, despite Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act, provided specific allegations are made.
Sales executed after taking possession under the SARFAESI Act are void, affirming the authority of civil courts in possession disputes involving third parties.
The court ruled that valid sales transactions were established over mere loan claims, emphasizing that contracts concerning property require mutual agreement to rescind and are enforceable as agreed.
Court held that transactions made during the subsistence of a mortgage are void under the SARFAESI Act; the auction purchaser's rights were upheld despite challenges to the validity of earlier transf....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
