1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

SUMMONS FOR JUDGEMENT NO.728 OF 2002

IN

SUMMARY SUIT NO.1640 OF 2001

Lexicon Finance Ltd. .. Plaintiff

Versus

Park Securities Ltd. .. Defendants

Mr.H.J.Thakore with Ms.Agnes Baradia i/b.

Thakore Jariwala and Associates for plaintiff

Mr.Shailesh Bondre i/b. Niranjan and Co. for

defendants.

CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J

DATE : 5th July 2005.

P.C.

. Heard Mr.Thakore, learned Counsel

appearing for plaintiffs and Mr.Bondre, learned

Counsel appearing for defendants.

2. At the outset Mr.Thakore invites my

attention to an order passed on 14th November

2

2003 by this Court. By this order, this Court

has held that Intercorporate Deposit Agreement

amounts to a bond as defined under section 2(c)

of the Bombay Stamps Act, 1958 and, therefore,

this Court directed the instrument (ICD Exh.A) to

be impounded. Mr.Thakore states that liability

of stamp duty along with penalty in respect of

this instrument would be discharged within a

period of four weeks from today. Mr.Thakore

states that he accepts the declaration given by

this Court and agrees to abide by the same by

paying stamp duty and deficit, if any, along with

penalty, subject, of course, to the rights of

plaintiffs under the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958.

3. Mr.Bondre, learned Counsel appearing for

defendants has no objection to this course of

action. It is on the aforesaid basis, I have

heard parties on merits of the matter.

Mr.Thakore, learned Counsel appearing for

plaintiffs states that the suit is based upon,

3

not only on written contract/ intercorporate

deposit but also on promisory note executed along

with intercorporate deposit. He invites my

attention to the terms wherein parties have

agreed that on plaintiffs advancing a sum of Rs.4

lakhs it shall be utilised by defendant company.

Defendant company undertook to repay the same

with interest on or before 28th April 1998.

Clauses in the Intercorporate deposit agreement,

according to Mr.Thakore are clear, inasmuch as

default in payment was to carry interest at 24%

p.a. Besides this, according to Mr.Thakore, on

demand promisory note, makes it abundantly clear

that defendant would pay on demand a sum of Rs.4

lakhs. Then my attention is invited to a receipt

Exh.C, which acknowledges receipt of a sum of

Rs.4 lakhs and the obligation to repay on 28th

April 1998. Since the amount was not repaid,

demand notice was issued and ultimately on 18th

April 2001 present suit was lodged. Mr.Thakore

states that there is a clear acknowledgement of