ORDER :

1. The applicant who has been adjudged an insolvent has moved this Court to annul the ex parte order of adjudication dated 28.09.2015 (A.No.298 of 2018) and to stay all further proceedings in I.P.No.5 of 2015 (A.No.299 of 2018) accusing the first respondent of being a Shylock wanting its pound of flesh, the counsel for the applicant playing Portia to his Bassanio claiming that the 1st respondent Bank had launched a multi pronged legal battle despite being adequately secured.

2. In order to appreciate the grievance of the applicant it is necessary to recapitulate the suits filed by M/s.Ind Bank Housing Limited in C.S.No.1023 of 1998 and C.S.Nos.33 and 52 of 1999 and the consent decree obtained by the first respondent herein who had got themselves substituted as plaintiff just prior to the passing of the consent decree.

Facts preceeding the filing of the applications:

2.1. The applicant herein and his late brother Ravi Shankar Prasad and their companies M/s. Mahalakshmi Properties and Investment Private Limited, M/s. Green Gardens Private Limited and M/s. Gemini Arts Private Limited had borrowed money from M/s. Ind Bank Housing Ltd.. Since the amounts were not repaid as promised, M/s. Ind Bank Housing Ltd., had filed CS.No.1023 of 1998 against M/s. Mahalakshmi Properties and Investment Private Limited and their Directors A. Sriramulu and Gopalkrishnan. Likewise M/s. Ind Bank Housing Ltd., had filed a suit C.S.No.33 of 1999 against M/s. Green Gardens Private Limited and the applicant herein and his late brother Ravi Shankar Prasad and C.S.No.52 of 1999 was filed against M/s. Gemni Arts Private Limited and the applicant and his late brother Ravi Shankar Prasad.

2.2. While the above suits were pending, the defendants had approached the plaintiff namely M/s. Ind Bank Housing Limited with a proposal to settle all their dues which was to the tune of Rs.1910 lakhs towards full and final payment of their outstanding. The said proposal was also accepted by M/s. Ind Bank Housing Limited vide their letter dated 30.08.2006.

2.3 M/s. Ind Bank Housing Limited had thereafter assigned the debts due from the defendants in the suit C.S.Nos.1023 of 1998, 33 and 52 of 1999 to M/s. Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, the first respondent herein under a Deed of Assignment dated 13.10.2006. The assignment was made for a consideration of Rs.1885 lakhs. Consequently, the first respondent had filed applications for substituting themselves as the plaintiff in A.No.2453 of 2007 and the said application was ordered on 21.03.2007. Thereafter, the first respondent as plaintiff had entered into a Memorandum of Compromise dated 23.10.2006 with the applicant and others. The said Memorandum of Compromise was filed into Court and a decree dated 26.03.2007 was passed in C.S.Nos.1023 of 1998, 33 and 52 of 1999.

2.4. As per the Compromise decree, different amounts were payable in each of the suits. The amounts payable in C.S.No.1023 of 1998 was to the tune of a sum of Rs.29,18,59,531/-. The payment was to commence from 14.10.2006 and was to be concluded within a period of 90 days from 14.10.2006. The terms of the Compromise further provided that in case payments were not made within 90 days then a further grace period of 180 days starting from the 91st day was to be given to the defendants. The Memorandum of Compromise contains a clause that post dated cheques have been issued to the plaintiff by the defendants. In case the amounts were not paid as per the schedule or in the event of default as mentioned in the Compromise then the entire amount with interest at 20 per cent per annum from 14.10.2009 till date of payment would become payable by the defendants therein. The plaintiff namely the first respondent herein was entitled to recover this amount from the defendants and / or the Mortgagor. On the payment being made, the terms of the consent decree would stand satisfied. The Memorandum of Compromise further stipulated that until payments are fully made, the defendants co