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

2017 Supreme(Guj) 680

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R. Subhash Reddy and V.M. Pancholi, JJ.
Ashita Nilesh Patel and Ors. – Appellants
Vs.
Deputy Secretary-Home Department and Ors. – Respondents
Special Civil Application Nos. 18637, 18638, 18639 of 2015, Letters Patent Appeal No. 463 of 2015 in Special Civil Application No. 5724 of 2014, Letters Patent Appeal No. 464 of 2015 in Special Civil Application No. 5400 of 2014, Letters Patent Appeal No. 480 of 2015 in Special Civil Application No. 6012 of 2014 and Letters Patent Appeal No. 481 of 2015 in Special Civil Application No. 4689 of 2014
Decided On : 29-03-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :K.S. Nanavati, Senior Advocate assisted by Nandish Chudgar, Raheel Patel and Prateek Bhatia, Advocates for Nanavati Associates, Advocate
For the Respondent:P.K. Jani, Senior Advocate and Avinash Avadh, Advocate

Headnote:

Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishment) Act, 1999 – Sections 4(1) and 5(1) – Letters Patent are filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against a common CAV order passed by Single Judge in Special Civil Application and allied matters, whereby Single Judge has dismissed petitions without entering into merits on ground of forum conveniens reserving liberty to the concerned petitioners to move Bombay High Court or any Court subordinate thereto – Held, Convenience would include the existence of more appropriate forum, expenses involved, law relating to the lis, verification of certain facts which are necessitous for just adjudication of the controversy and such other ancillary aspects – Place of convenience is also required to be taken into consideration – Court is of view that it would be appropriate on the part of this Court to relegate the petitioners to appropriate Court at Maharashtra including Court designated under MPID Act, as may be advised, on principle of forum conveniens without entering into merits of contentions raised in these petitions – Petitions Dismissed – Letters Patent Appeals disposed of. (Paras 30, 31)

JUDGMENT :

V.M. Pancholi, J.

1. All the captioned petitions being Special Civil Application Nos. 18637 of 2017 to 18639 of 2017 are filed by the concerned petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, whereby the petitioners have challenged the notifications dated 12.03.2016 and 22.06.2015 issued by respondent No. 1 purportedly on behalf of the State of Maharashtra, stating that the properties enlisted therein are attached under Sections 4(1) and 5(1) of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishment) Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as 'MPID Act'). Petitioners have also challenged the direction given by respondent No. 2 to respondent Nos. 5 and 6, whereby they were directed to make necessary entries in the revenue records regarding the properties of the petitioners.

2. Whereas, Letters Patent Nos. 463 of 2015 to 464 of 2015 and 480 of 2015 to 481 of 2015 are filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against a common CAV order dated 24.02.2015 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 4689 of 2014 and allied matters, whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the petitions without entering into the merits on the ground of 'forum conveniens' reserving liberty to the concerned petitioners to move the Bombay High Court or any Court subordinate thereto.

3. The issue involved in the aforesaid petitions as well as Letters Patent Appeals is similar and therefore this Court, by an order dated 03.03.2016, directed the Registry to place the papers of Letters Patent Appeal 464 of 2015 and allied matters along with the aforesaid petitions and with the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the parties, the aforesaid appeals are heard with the aforesaid petitions and are being disposed of by this common judgment. However, for the sake of convenience, the facts narrated in Special Civil Application No. 18637 of 2015 are recorded.

4. The facts in nutshell are as under:

"4.1. That N.K. Proteins Private Limited, formerly known as N.K. Proteins Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'NKPL') is a Private Limited Company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in the business of manufacturing, processing and marketing of vegetable edible oils, viz. Washed Cotton Seed Oil, Crude Palm Oil, Crude Degummed Soyabean Oil, Crude Sunflower Seed Oil, Groundnut Oil, etc. The same is also engaged in seed processing, solvent extraction and also trading in edible/non-edible oils. One Mr. Nilesh Patel is the Managing Director of the said company, whereas Mr. Nimesh Patel is Chairman of the said Company. Petitioner No. 1 of Special Civil Application No. 18637 of 2015 is wife of Mr. Nilesh Patel, whereas petitioner No. 2 is wife of Mr. Nimesh Patel and both are also holding shares of NKPL.

4.2. National Spot Exchange Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'NSEL') is a company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, which was incorporated in May 2005. The main object of NSEL was of providing electronic platform for the purpose of trading of agricultural based commodities. The Government of India, vide notification dated 05.06.2007 issued under Section 27 of the Forward Contracts (Regulation) Act of 1952, exempted NSEL from the operation of the provisions of the said Act on certain conditions. The said Electronic Exchange of NSEL became operative from 15.10.2008. NKPL became a member of the said Exchange from October 2008. Thus, NKPL was permitted to carry out activities on the said Exchange for itself and/or on behalf of its clients. However, by communication dated 12.07.2013, the Central Government had directed the NSEL that no fresh contracts shall be launched on or through the Exchange Platform of NSEL until further instructions from the concerned Authority and therefore, NSEL, vide its Circular dated 31.07.2013, had suspended all the contracts until further notice. As a result of the aforesaid crisis, many investors, who claimed to ha















































































































































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 Back to top