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

2018 Supreme(Guj) 966

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
C.L. SONI, J.
Naval Technoplast Industries Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Pavankishore Kailashchandra Tibrewala - Respondent
Appeal From Order No. 39 of 2018, Civil Application No. 1, 2 of 2018
Decided On : 31-07-2018

Advocates Appeared:
Meghna A Patel, Adv., Manthan K Bhatt, Adv., Pooja H Bhardwaj, Adv.

Headnote:

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 - Section 13(4) - Above reliefs prayed are in connection with the different properties as described in the plaint - Learned advocate appearing for the appellants has declared at the outset that the appellants restrict their challenge to the impugned order only for the property - As stated in para-11 of the plaint, the property is the plot purchased by the appellant - Held, Bank or financial institution, which has created security interest in any property, is entitled to enforce its security interest for recovery of its dues without intervention of the Court and the Bank or financial institution after applying the sale proceeds first to charges and expenses and receiving the due amount will make available the residue money for the persons entitled thereto in accordance with his right and interest - In the context of above provisions of SARFAESI ACT, the plaintiffs may find their remedies before appropriate forum or may resort to other remedy as available in law - Appeal disposed of. (Para 18)

JUDGMENT

C.L. SONI, J.

1. Arguments were heard for final disposal of the appeal with consent of learned advocates appearing for the parties.

2. The appeal is filed under Order XLIII of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 ("the Code") by original defendant Nos.16, 17 and 18 of civil suit No.1378 of 2016 against the order dated 20.12.2017 passed by learned Chamber, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad below application Exh.7 with notice of motion Exh.6 in above referred suit.

3. The respondents no.1 to 3 are the original plaintiffs. The respondent no.1 is the husband of the respondent no.2 and father of the respondent no.3. Following prayers are made in paragraph no.34 of the plaint:

"(A) May be pleased to declare Late SHRI KAILASHCHANDRA RAMKUMAR TIBREWALA to be an owner of suit property no.1 to 23 and also declare that plaintiff no. 1 has 1/4th or 1/5th share in the said suit property no.1 to 23 and further be pleased to declare the plaintiff no.1 to be an absolute owner of his share in suit property no.1 to 23.

OR

May be pleased to declare that plaintiff no.1 and defendant no.1 to 3 have equal share in the suit property no.1 to 23.

(B) May be pleased to pass an order of partition of the suit property no. 1 to 23 and also pass an order of part with the exclusive possession of 1.4th or 1/5th portion of suit property no. 1 to 23 in favour of Plaintiff no.1.

(C) May be pleased to direct the defendants to produce the resolutions, accounts abstracts and bank statements i.e. Profit & Loss, income tax returns, Charge, lien and documentary records, loan, Mortgage etc. of suit property no. 1 to 18 in this court.

(D) May be pleased to appoint a Receiver to take over the charge of the suit property no. 1 to 18 for better and transparent administration of the business of suit property no.1 to 18 as well as to produce true and correct account and records of suit property no.1 to 18 before this Hon'ble Court.

(E) May be pleased to direct the defendant no.16 to 19 to produce the account i.e. Profit & Loss, Charge, lien, loan, Mortgage, business transaction of purchase of raw material, equipments, machineries and sale of ready material including Chalan, Invoices, Bill of lading, "C" form, ledger, statement of banks account, expenses, each and every books of accounts and records etc. This Hon'ble Court may also be pleased to direct the defendant no.16 to 19 to produce agreement, permissions etc. regarding overseas business.

(F) May be pleased to grant permanent injunction against the defendants from Selling, Transferring, Leasing, Licensing, mortgaging, Disposing, Dissolving or in any way dealing with the joint family business and properties and to restrain them to part with or alienate with the possession to any persons in suit property no.1 to 23.

(G) May be pleased to pass an order of attachment before judgment of the suit property no. 1 to 18 property and direct the court receiver to take charge of the undivided family businesses, movable/immovable properties/assets.

(H) May be pleased to appoint a Court Commissioner and direct him to prepare an inventory of all movable/immovable property and other valuable created from the joint family funds as per the schedule.

(I) May be pleased to grant any other and further relief as may be deem fit and necessary in the interest of law, justice and equity."

4. The above reliefs prayed are in connection with the different properties as described in the plaint. Learned advocate Mr.Parikh appearing for the appellants has declared at the outset that the appellants restrict their challenge to the impugned order only for the property No.17. As stated in para-11 of the plaint, the property No.17 is the plot No.4, GIDC, Kathwada, ad-measuring 8307.86 Sqmts purchased by the appellant no.1 in the year 2004.

5. Learned Judge has partly allowed the application Exh.7 with notice of motion Exh.6 and passed following interim order:

"Defendant Nos.1 to 15 are hereby restrained to maintain status-quo qua the possession and title of the properties be





























































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
whatsapp-icon Back to top