Disposed

Ots Ltd., Rep. Herein by Its Director, Rajendra Kumar Gupta., v. Pramod Damodar Borker and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC18 Mar 2021CP/49/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt petition, the High Court of Bombay at Goa disposed of the proceedings after the respondent deposited a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/-, holding that this demonstrated a lack of wilful disobedience and leaving the balance recovery to the executing court.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings disposed of; liberty granted to rely on funds deposited to recover dues from respondent's company.

Ots Ltd., Rep. Herein by Its Director, Rajendra Kumar Gupta., Vs Pramod Damodar Borker and 2 Ors. — Bombay HC (2021) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

¶3

CONTEMPT PETITION NO.49 OF 2018 IN COMPANY PETITION NO.6 OF 2016

¶4

OTS LTD.,
REP. HEREIN BY ITS DIRECTOR,
RAJENDRA KUMAR GUPTA.

¶5

...Petitioner

¶6

VS

¶7

PRAMOD DAMODAR BORKER
AND 2 ORS.,

¶8

...
Respondents

¶9

Mr. Vibhav Amonkar, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. J. J. Mulgaonkar, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 and 3.
Mr. Alok P. Borkar, present in person.

¶10

Coram : M. S. SONAK, J
Date : 18th March 2021

¶11

P.C.

¶12

 Heard Mr. V. Amonkar, learned counsel for the Petitioner
and Mr. J. J. Mulgaonkar, learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 and 3.
Mr. Alok P. Borkar, is also present in person.

¶13

2. On 15th January 2021, the following order was made :

¶14

“Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. Mr. Alok P.
Borkar, the Director is present in the Court.

¶15

2. Mr. Alok Borkar gives an undertaking to this Court that
he will, within a period of four weeks from today, deposit
in this Court an amount of Rs.3,50,000/-. This means that

¶16

¶17

the amount of Rs.3,50,000/- will be deposited on or before
16/02/2021. Mr. Alok Borkar states that within a further
period of four weeks i.e. by 16/03/2021, he will make a
further deposit of Rs.3,50,000/- in this Court. He states
that these amounts can then be paid to the Petitioner.

¶18

3. The undertakings given by Mr. Borkar to this Court in
the presence of the learned Counsel for the parties, are
accepted. Mr. Borkar will have to comply with such
undertakings.

¶19

4. In the facts of the present case, if the amount of
Rs.7,00,000/- as against the total dues of approximately
Rs.14,00,000/- are received by the Petitioner, then, this
Court will consider whether this contempt proceedings
should be taken any further. If this amount is indeed
received by the Petitioner, this Court might even consider
relegating the Petitioner to recover the balance amount by
taking out appropriate execution proceedings before the
appropriate forum.

¶20

5. Mr. Borkar states that liberty may be granted to him to
recover this amount of Rs.7,00,000/- from M/s. Borkar
Colorpacks Pvt. Ltd., the Company which, according to
him, was primarily responsible for making payments to the
Petitioner herein. This plea can be considered once Mr.
Borkar deposits the amount of Rs.7,00,000/- before this
Court.

¶21

6. The matter is now posted on 18/02/2021 to see whether
Mr. Borkar complies with these new undertakings tendered
before the Court. Mr. Borkar will have to remain present in
the Court in these proceedings on all further dates, unless
he secures previous exemption.

¶22

7. S.O. to 18/02/2021.”

¶23

¶24

3. Mr. Mulgaonkar and Mr. Borkar point out that as of now Mr. Borkar has deposited in this Court an amount of 7,00,000/- in ₹ terms of undertaking recorded in the above order dated 15th January 2021.

¶25

4. Mr. Mulgaonkar and Mr. Borkar point out that on 15^th January 2021, there was reference to an amount of 14,00,000/- or ₹ thereabouts being due and payable to the Petitioner. They however point out that the accounts have been reconciled and according to them dues comes to approximately 10,00,000/-. Mr. V. Amonkar, however ₹ disputes this position.

¶26

5. According to me, this is not the proper stage to go into the dispute as to whether the amount payable to the Petitioner is indeed ₹ 14,00,000/- or thereabouts or 10,00,000/-. This will be the matter ₹ which will have to be looked into by the Executing Court at the appropriate stage. Therefore, all contentions of parties with regard to the precise amount due and payable to the Petitioner are left open.

¶27

6. Now that an amount of 7,00,000/- has been deposited in ₹ this Court, liberty can always be granted to the Petitioner to withdraw the said amount no doubt, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of all parties. Accordingly, such liberty is granted to the Petitioner.

¶28

¶29

7. Further, now that Mr. Borkar has arranged to deposit an amount of 7,00,000/-, it is only appropriate that this contempt ₹ proceedings should not be taken any further. By depositing this amount at least Mr. Borkar has established that there was no intention on his part to willfully or deliberately disobey the orders made by this Court. In such circumstances, these contempt proceedings can be disposed of leaving the parties to pursue their remedies before the Executing Court or any other forum as may be provided in law.

¶30

8.Accordingly, these contempt proceedings are disposed of.
Liberty is granted to the parties to pursue the matter of recovery before
the Executing Court or any other forum as provided under the law. All
contentions of all parties including the contentions on the precise
amount due and payable are expressly left open.

¶31

9. That in paragraph 5 of the order dated 15th January 2021, it was clarified that Mr. Borkar, who has now deposited an amount of ₹ 7,00,000/- will have liberty to recover this amount from M/s. Borkar Colorpacks Pvt. Ltd., the Company which, according to Mr. Borkar was primarily responsible for making payments to the Petitioner. Such liberty is reiterated subject to no doubt whatever defences that the Company will have in this matter. Accordingly, all contentions with regard to such liberty are also left open for determination by the appropriate Court/forum at the appropriate stage.

¶32

¶33

10. This petition is disposed of with liberty as aforesaid.

¶34

M. S. SONAK, J.

¶35

at*

¶36

TARI AMRUT

¶37

NAGESH

¶38

Digitally signed by TARI AMRUT NAGESH Date: 2021.03.18 14:39:18 +05'30'

Ots Ltd., Rep. Herein by Its Director, Rajendra Kumar Gupta., v. Pramod Damodar Borker and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ots Ltd., Rep. Herein by Its Director, Rajendra Kumar Gupta., v. Pramod Damodar Borker and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harichandra Vitola Porobo Aliso Known as Horichondar Vitto Porobo and 3 Ors., Vs Narana Pandu Porobo Gauncar (Deceased) and 8 Ors.

Vithal Harishchandra Porob., Vs Narana Pandu Porobo Gauncar (Deceased) and 8 Ors.

Amiantit Fiberglass Industries India Pvt. Ltd. (in Liquidation), Thr. Official Liquidator., Vs Corportation Bank, Panaji.

Kashinath Jairam Shetye Vs Deelip Raghavendra Shetye and 2 Ors.

Communidade of Mapusa through Its Attorney Mr. Antonio Braganza Vs Prabhavati Prabhakar Parob and Anr.

Shri Baburao Tukaram Mangale Vs Mrs. Ratnadeep Builders Represented by Its Sole Proprietor, Mr. Madhav N. Naik Kundaikar