Disposed

Bharat Udayog Limited v. Mahrashtra Industrial Devlopment Corporation

Bombay HC26 Aug 2024IA/1796/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Decree holder and judgment debtor settled a commercial execution application; undertakings recorded, award clauses (d), (e) and (f) of the 2 December 2017 award marked satisfied, and decree holders permitted to withdraw deposited sums.

What did the court decide?

Judgment creditors permitted to withdraw Rs. 11,76,23,739.52 with accrued interest; award dated 2 December 2017 (clauses d, e, f) marked satisfied; execution application disposed on settlement.

Bharat Udayog Limited vs Mahrashtra Industrial… — Execution and Attachment | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

IA 1796-24 in COMEX 1231-18 @ IAL 4852-21.doc

¶2

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

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1796 OF 2024 IN

¶4

COMMERCIAL EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 1231 OF 2018

¶5

Bharat Udyog Limited and Anr. ...Applicant

¶6

V/s.

¶7

Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation ...Respondents

¶8

WITH

¶9

INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 4852 OF 2021

¶10

Mr. Siddharth Samantray with Mr. Nikhil Patil i/b P. M. Jadhav for Decree Holder.

¶11

Ms. Shyamali Gadre with Mr. A. Kulkarni i/b Little and Co. for MIDCJudgment Debtor.

¶12

Mr. Shrichand Kukreja, Authorized Signatory of Decree Holder.

¶13

CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J. DATE : 19^th DECEMBER, 2024

¶14

P.C. :

¶15

Pursuant to the earlier orders of this Court, ending with order

¶16

Digitally signed by NIKITA NIKITA YOGESH YOGESH GADGIL GADGIL Date: 2024.12.19 19:30:53 +0530

¶17

dated 11^th December, 2024, today the matter has been circulated as the

¶18

parties viz. the Applicants and the Respondents have arrived at settlement.

¶19

Mr. Samantray, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicants

¶20

tenders across the bar an affidavit dated 19^th December, 2024 of one Mr. Shrichand Kukreja, who is the authorised signatory of the

¶21

Nikita Gadgil 1/4

¶22

IA 1796-24 in COMEX 1231-18 @ IAL 4852-21.doc

¶23

Applicant-Judgment Creditor submitting that if the Judgment Creditor is permitted by the Judgment Debtor viz. Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (“MIDC”) to withdraw the sum of Rs. 11,76,23,739.52 deposited by the MIDC in this Court then the Applicant-Decree Holder undertakes : (a) Not claim any further amounts under Commercial Execution Application No. 1231 of 2018, (b) Not claim running of interest on the sum deposited of Rs. 11,76,23,739.52 beyond the date of 15^th July, 2024 in the Commercial Execution Application No. 1231 of 2018, (c) withdraw the attachment of the head office of MIDC, (d) withdraw Interim Application No. 1796 of 2024 seeking amendment of Column J to include bank accounts of MIDC, and (e) consent to the disposal of the Commercial Execution Application No. 1231 of 2018 without demanding any further payment from MIDC under the present proceedings.

¶24

The Applicants – Judgment Creditor has further undertaken that they will not claim the amounts that form part of Commercial Execution Application No. 1231 of 2018 in any other proceedings whatsoever and that the award dated 2^nd December, 2017 to the extent of final relief Clauses (d), (e) and (f) shall be marked as satisfied in the above terms. The said affidavit dated 19^th December, 2024 is taken on

¶25

Nikita Gadgil 2/4

¶26

IA 1796-24 in COMEX 1231-18 @ IAL 4852-21.doc

¶27

record. The undertakings contained in the affidavit are accepted as undertakings to this Court.

¶28

In response to the said affidavit by the Applicant-Judgment Creditor, the MIDC-the Respondent-Judgment Debtor has also filed an affidavit of Mr. Avinash T. Gadhade, Deputy Engineer of the MIDC reiterating the aforesaid understanding and submitting that in view of the undertakings mentioned in the affidavit dated 19^th December, 2024 of the Applicant-Judgment Creditor, the Judgment Debtor does not have any objection for withdrawal of Rs. 11,76,23,739.52 and that the award dated 2^nd December, 2017 to the extent of final relief Clauses (d), (e) and (f) be marked satisfied.

¶29

Both the learned Counsel submit that in view of the aforesaid affidavits, this Court dispose of the Commercial Execution Application as well as the Interim Application. The award dated 2^nd December, 2017 to the extent of final relief Clauses (d), (e) and (f) is marked satisfied.

¶30

In view of the aforesaid, the Execution Application and the connected Interim Applications stand disposed in the above terms. The Prothonotary and Senior Master of this Court is directed to permit the

¶31

Nikita Gadgil 3/4

¶32

IA 1796-24 in COMEX 1231-18 @ IAL 4852-21.doc

¶33

Judgment Creditors to withdraw the sum of Rs. 11,76,23,739.52 along with accrued interest upon a joint application made by the Judgment Creditors.

¶34

(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)

¶35

Nikita Gadgil 4/4

Bharat Udayog Limited v. Mahrashtra Industrial Devlopment Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bharat Udayog Limited v. Mahrashtra Industrial Devlopment Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Munna R. Purthalppa vs Ramesh Harilal Mehta and Anr.

Official Liquidator of Patheja Forgings and Auto Parts Manugacturers Ltd. (in Liquidation) vs B.I.F.R (Petitioner)

Official Liquidator of Patheja Brothers Forgings and Stampings Ltd. (in Liquidation) vs Devi Construction Co.Pvt. Ltd. (Petitioner)

Vipula Monga vs Hamco Steels and Alloys Ltd.

Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. vs Sitaram Lalaprasad Tiwari

Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. vs Bandappa Bhimrao Kakakdhand