Allowed

Tata Capital Ltd. v. Dass Elctric Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. and 6 Ors.

Bombay HC17 Aug 2011ARBP/668/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Arbitration petition filed under section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. The court rejected an adjournment application, noted a prima facie dues amount, and granted relief for asset disclosure and an interim injunction against alienation of property.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to file affidavit of assets by 15 September 2011. Restricted respondents from disposing of, alienating, encumbering, or parting with possession of immovable properties without lea

Tata Capital Ltd. Vs Dass Elctric Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. and 6 Ors. — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2011)

903.arbp.668.11

skt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶5

ARBITRATION PETITION NO.668 OF 2011

¶6

M/s.Tata Capital Ltd. ..Petitioner -Versus-

¶7

M/s.Dass Electric Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd.

¶8

& Ors. ..Respondents

¶9

Mr.Chetan Kapadia a/w. Mr.Durgesh Singh, Mr.Rahul Gade i/b India Law for the Petitioner.

¶10

None for the Respondents.

¶11

CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 17^TH AUGUST 2011.

¶12

P.C.

¶13

1 This is a petition under section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act.

¶14

2 In view of the nature of these proceedings and the order I intend passing the application for an adjournment for filing an affidavit -inrejoinder is rejected. The plaintiff shall be entitled to proceed on the basis of denials.

¶15

3 Prima-facie, an amount of over Rs.1.10 crores is due and payable by

¶16

the respondents to the petitioner in respect of the facilities granted by the

¶17

¶18

903.arbp.668.11

¶19

petitioner to respondent no.1 and guaranteed by the other respondents. The repayment of the amounts was secured by the mortgage of various properties. These properties however, have been seized by the Receiver appointed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune in proceedings adopted by the Canara Bank.

¶20

3 In the circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to protect his claim to be made in arbitration.

¶21

4 The petition is, therefore, disposed of by the following order :

¶22

(i) The respondents shall disclose on affidavit all their assets. The affidavit shall be filed on or before 15^th September 2011.

¶23

(ii) The respondents are restrained from further disposing of, alienating, encumbering, parting with possession of or creating any third party rights in respect of their immovable properties without the leave of the Court or the Arbitral Tribunal.

¶24

However, it is clarified that the injunction shall operate from today. Earlier there was an ad-interim order dated 28^th July 2011. This order shall not affect rights of any third parties especially banks or any other financial institutions.

¶25

¶26

903.arbp.668.11

¶27

5 Liberty to apply to have this order modified after the affidavits are

¶28

filed.

Tata Capital Ltd. v. Dass Elctric Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tata Capital Ltd. v. Dass Elctric Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

L and T Finance Dltd. Vs Birappa a. Mane and Anr.

L and T Finance Dltd. Vs Gulshan Kumar Sharma and Balramkumar Sharma

L and T Finance Dltd. Vs Vasant K. Valte and Anr.

M/S Shah Promoters and Developers Vs Suzlon Energy Limited

M/S Shah Promoters and Developers Vs Suzlon Energy Limited

M/S Shah Promoters and Developers Vs Suzlon Energy Limited