Dismissed

The Cotton Corporation of India v. Krishna Knitwear Technology Ltd.

Bombay HC27 Aug 2015CHS/481/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay at Bombay allowed the applicant to withdraw a Chamber Summons for enforcing Bank Guarantees in execution proceedings. The court noted apparent compliance with the security order of May 5, 2015, permitted the withdrawal, and retained contentions open with liberty to apply again.

What did the court decide?

The Chamber Summons is allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh Chamber Summons if solvent surety is not provided.

The Cotton Corporation of India Vs Krishna Knitwear… — Execution and Attachment | Bombay HC (2015)

926-a-CHS-481-13

vmc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶6

CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.481 OF 2013 IN EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 663 OF 2013 IN AWARD DATED 23/10/2007

¶7

The Cotton Corporation of India … Applicants (Org.Claimants) IN THE MATTER BETWEEN The Cotton Corporation of India … Claimants Versus Krishna Knitwear Technologies Ltd. … Respondents

¶8

Mr. Naushad Engineer a/w Ms. Pooja Shah i/b M/s. Dhruve Liladhar & Co. for Applicant.

¶9

Mr. Ajit Anekar a/w Shriniket Deshpande i/b M/s. Auris Legal for Respondents.

¶10

CORAM : A.K. MENON, J. DATE : AUGUST 27, 2015.

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

The present Chamber Summons is taken out by the applicant / Judgment Creditor to enforce security provided in the form of Bank Guarantees. The Advocate for the surety filed one Bank Guarantee provided by the respondent. Pursuant to order of the Division Bench of the First Court in Notice of Motion No.4/2013, the applicant was directed to renew the Bank Guarantee and shall keep renewing the Bank Guarantee in the sum of Rs.7.50 crores till the final disposal of the appeals and for a period of three months thereafter. In addition, the

¶13

vmc 2 926-a-CHS-481-13

¶14

applicant was to provide solvent security in the form of immovable property and corporate guarantee both in the sum of Rs.6.25 crores to the satisfaction of the Prothonotary and Senior Master, within a period of six weeks from 05/05/2015.

¶15

It is common ground that the Bank Guarantee has been provided and is being renewed. Furthermore, the respondents have offered solvent surety. However, the same has not been accepted by the Prothonotary and Senior Master since the valuation of the properties and solvency of the corporate guarantee is being looked into. Today, the learned counsel for the applicant seeks permission to withdraw the Chamber Summons on the basis that it may not be necessary to press the same today. The order dated 5 May 2015 appears to have been complied with. However, in the event of solvent surety not being provided, it may become necessary for the Applicant to apply once again for the same relief. Accordingly, I pass the following order :

¶16

(i) The Chamber Summons is allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh Chamber Summons as prayed.

¶17

(ii) All contentions are kept open.

¶18

(iii) No order as to costs.

926-a-CHS-481-13

vmc

C E R T I F I C A T E

¶23

Certified to be true and correct copy of the original signed

¶24

Order.¹

¶25

1 Order is corrected as per Speaking to the Minutes order dated 15^th September, 2015.

The Cotton Corporation of India v. Krishna Knitwear Technology Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Cotton Corporation of India v. Krishna Knitwear Technology Ltd.

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

Kamayani Bali Mahabal Vs Wadia Trust and 3 Ors.

Mahindra Lifespace Developers Ltd. Vs Pradeep Vora

Ms Universal Computer Vs Asset International

Efkon (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs M.B. Gajbhiye and 2 Ors.

L and T Finance Limited Vs M/S. Shree Sainath Travels and Anr.

Harish R. Chheda Vs Jayaram K. Bhandari and 25 Ors.