Back
2001 Supreme(Raj) 1324
Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench
Honble ARUN MADAN, J.
M/s. Orbital International Ltd. & Anr. - Appellant
Versus
M/s. Rajasthan State Industrial Development & Investment Corporation Ltd. & Another - Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1602 of 2001
Decided On : December 20, 2001
K.K. Mehrishi & Sanjay Mehrishi, for Petitioners Ajeet Bhandari, for Respondents No. 1 & 2 Ashok Mehta, for applicants Umesh Kapoor & Ors.
Headnote:Rajasthan State Industrial Development & Investment Corporation Disposal of Land Rules, 1979, Rule 18; C.P.C., Order 1 Rule 10 – Entitlement of the petitioner to get the plot transferred in its favour seeking writ of mandamus against Bhiwadi Industrial Development Authority – Impleadment Application – held – Petitioner Company having fulfilled the requisites as contemplated under Rule 18 holding majority shares (minimum 51%) and at least more than 49% which the applicants hold, are legally entitled to get the disputed plot transferred in their favour subject to final adjudication of the dispute – Under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC Court can not compel a person to fight against a person against whom he does not claim any relief as the plaintiff is the dominos litis. (Paras 14 to 17)
Controversy raised and the relief sought for in this petition is as to whether the petitioners Co. is entitled to get transfer f plot in dispute in its favour under the RIICO Disposal of Land Rules 1979 seeking writ of mandamus against the BIDA (respondent). Keeping in view ``real controversy of transfer of plot in dispute, I do not find that the applicants are necessary party to this writ petition and without their presence the question in the petition can be completely decided and furthermore in view of the pleadings on record the applicants having minor share holdings have no direct and substantive interest in this petition seeking transfer of the plot in dispute. (Para 14)
(2). Facts though complexed by the parties but are shorn in details are epitomised for the relevance of disposal of this petition. Admittedly M/s. Opera House Exports Ltd. was allotted an industrial plot No. A-1133, measuring 10000 sq. mtrs. in Phase III of RIICO industrial Area, Bhiwadi (Rajasthan) (for brevity ``the plot) by the respondents on 21.02.1992 and that apart, pursuant thereto, a lease agreement (Ann.A) was executed on 27.03.1995 by respondent No. 1 (for short ``RIICO) in favour of M/s Opera House Export Ltd. for the plot. Similarly, M/s. Opera House Export Ltd. admittedly upon its application for transfer of its rights over the plot in favour of its sister concern viz. M/s. Opera House Credit & Holdings Pvt. Ltd., was accorded transfer permission on 30.8.1997 which resulted in transfer of rights over the plot on 02.06.1998 to the transferee Pvt. Ltd. Company subject to the condition that its Promoter/Director Sushil Kumar & his wife or family members shall hold shares in that private Co. to the extent of 51% only.
(3). Though the petitioners averred that one Umesh Kapoor was inducted as a Director with 49% shares in transferee Co. (M/s. Opera House Credit & Holding Pvt. Ltd.), but respondent No. 2 (BIDA) stated in its reply that no information was ever sent to respondent No. 1 (RIICO) as to the induction of Umesh Kapoor in the transferee Co. Similarly it is the case of the petitioners that subsequently name of the transferee Co. stood changed on 03.11.1998 to M/s. Prakunj Textiles Pvt. Ltd. but respondent (RIICO) did not recognise such change in name. However as per reply, it is the case of respondent No. 2 (BIDA) that no Holdings Pvt. Ltd. to Prakunj Textiles Pvt. Ltd. has been approved by respondent (RIICO), rather its approval or transfer as contemplated in RIICO Disposal Rules, 1979. While admitting the receipt of letters dt. 24.8.2000 (Ann.C) & 2.9.2000 (Ann.D) having been sent by M/s. Prakunj Textiles Pvt. Ltd. (changed name of transferee Co.) as to the application for further transfer of the plot ultimately in the name of M/s. Orbital International Ltd. (present petitioner No. 1), respondent No. 2 (BIDA) in reply averred that by letter dt. 2.9.2000, transfer of the plot was sought in the name of the petitioners Co. but in response thereto, by a letter dt. 12.10.2000 (Ann.R1) to S/Shri Sushil Kumar & Umesh Kapoor of the transferee Co. (M/s Opera House Credit & Holding Pvt. Ltd.) they were directed to personally appear with requisite information mentioned therein.
(4). Thus, admittedly Prakunj Textiles Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known as Opera House Credit (P) Ltd.) by its letter dt. 2.9.2000 (Ann.D) applied to transfer the plot in dispute under Rule 18(iv)(a) of the RICO Disposal of Land Rules 1979 in favour of its another group company (petitioner No. 1) and further by its letter dt. 2.3.2001 (Ann.E), petitioner (Co.) also requested for such transfer in the favour reiterating the averments made in letter (Ann.D), inter-alia that vide letter dt. 24.8.2000 M/s. Prakunj Textiles informed the RIICO confirming the shareholdings of Mr. Sushil Kumar &his family members. However, as per para (4) of letter dt. 2.3.2001 (Ann.E) it is an admitted position that though on 3.11.98 name of M/s. Opera House Credit & Holdings (P) Ltd. was changed to M/s. Prakunj Textile (P) Ltd. but RIICO till date did not recognise change of name. Hence, this writ petition.
(5). RIICO did not file its reply to this petition obviously because it is not disputed that RIICO (respondent No.1) constituted an Industrial Development Authority at Bhiwadi (respondent No.2) to d
