IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

Letters Patent Appeal No.142 of 2010

Date of decision: 21.04.2011

Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited (ARCIL)

…..Appellant

versus

M/s PML Industries Limited and others

……Respondents

CORAM:

Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh

Hon’ble Mr.Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg

Present:

Mr.Ashok Aggarwal, Senior Advocate with

Mr.Sumeet Goel, Advocate for the appellant

Mr.A.K.Chopra, Senior Advocate with

Ms.Rupa Pathania, Advocate for the respondent No.1

Mr.Manohar Lall, Addl.A.G.Punjab for the State

Jasbir Singh, J.

This order will dispose of three Letters Patent Appeals bearing

Nos.142 of 2010, 1120 of 2010 and 1542 of 2010, between the same parties

and arising out of a commercial transaction of loan raised by M/s PML

Industries Limited (in short, the company), in the year 1995.

LPA No.142 of 2010

This appeal has been filed by the Asset Reconstruction

Company (India) Limited (in short, ARCIL) to impugne an order passed by

a learned Single Judge on 11.1.2010 in CWP No.58 of 2010 allowing that

writ petition, filed by the company against an order passed by Debt

Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) on 23.12.2009, directing the

company to deposit 50% of the amount shown in the demand notice, before

the Debt Recovery Tribunal, by 7.1.2010.

Letters Patent Appeal No.142 of 2010

LPA No.1120 of 2010

After passing of an order by the learned Single Judge in CWP

No.58 of 2010 on 11.1.2010, the matter was taken up by the Debt Recovery

Tribunal (DRT) and vide order dated 13.1.2010, RA No.5 of 2009 filed by

the ARCIL was dismissed as having been become infructuous. On

15.1.2010, DRT allowed RA No.4 of 2009 filed by the company, orders

passed by the Tehsildar on 23.1.2006, to take over possession of the assets

of the company, at the instance of the ARCIL and also notice issued under

Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets

and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short SARFAESI Act)

dated 21.1.2003, were set aside. Action of the ARCIL, to initiate action

under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act against the company, was

declared illegal and without any jurisdiction. The ARCIL went in appeal

and the DRAT at Delhi, vide order dated 21.5.2010, quashed an order

passed by the DRT on 15.1.2010 and ordered that the ARCIL is not

precluded to proceed under the SARFAESI Act to recover the amount from

the company. The company has filed CWP No.10312 of 2010 to impugne

an order passed by the DRAT. On 20.8.2010, the learned Single Judge

restrained the ARCIL (respondent No.2) not to take coercive steps to

recover the disputed amount from the company. It was further ordered that

during pendency of that writ petition, the company shall not alienate or

encumber its secured or unsecured assets without prior permission of the

Court. Against order dated 20.8.2010, the ARCIL filed LPA No.1120 of

2010.

LPA No.1542 of 2010

The ARCIL has filed this appeal against an order dated

9.11.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in CM No.14915 of 2010 in

2

Letters Patent Appeal No.142 of 2010

CWP No.10312 of 2010. Vide that order, the ARCIL was directed to

produce Deed of Assignment/ Deed of Acquisition and further the

individual through whom reply/ affidavit was filed by the ARCIL, to show

his authority, the ARCIL was directed to file those documents. In this

appeal, notice of motion was not issued, however, it was ordered to be heard

along with LPA No.1120 of 2010 and continued to be adjourned from time

to time with that appeal.

The orders, which are under challenge in LPA No.1120 of 2010

and 1542 of 2010, came into existence after passing of an order by a Single

Judge in CWP No.58 of 2010 on 11.1.2010. That order is under challenge

in LPA No.142 of 2010 and decision in this appeal is likely to affect so far

as proceedings in other two appeals are concerned. Accordingly, we have

decid