Allowed

M/S Kauntum Papers Ltd. v. M/S Princess Choice Hotel Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Delhi HC13 Dec 2018CS(OS)/431/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Plaintiff sought recovery of Rs.1.95 crores outstanding under an MOU. Defendants admitted liability due to financial constraints but sought instalments. Court decreed recovery with 7% interest, deferred execution by plaintiff for six months, and extended interim restraint on property sale until payment.

What did the court decide?

Decreed payment of Rs.1,95,55,000 with 7% simple interest. Execution deferred for six months. Interim restraint on property sale continued until payment.

M/S Kauntum Papers Ltd. Vs M/S Princess Choice Hotel… — Execution and Attachment | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~OS-11

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

CS(OS) 431/2017 M/S KAUNTUM PAPERS LTD ..... Plaintiff Through Mr.Ashim Vachher and Mr.Aman Shaukin, Advs. with AR of plaintiff

¶4

versus

¶5

M/S PRINCESS CHOICE HOTEL PVT. LTD. & ORS..... Defendant Through Mr.Piyush Sharma, , Adv.

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH

O R D E R

13.12.2018

This suit is filed for recovery of Rs.2,30,11,197/-. The case of the plaintiff is that the plaintiff company had filed the suit under Order XXXVII CPC against M/s. Shree Swastic Sales Corporation Private Limited for recovery of Rs.9,25,92,523/- being CS(OS) 2854/2015 before this Court. This Court directed status quo to be maintained by the said defendants in the said suit with respect to their shareholding in M/s.Swift Global Private Limited and M/s.Swift Boutique Hotels Private Limited. It is the case of the plaintiff that despite status quo order Mr.Sanjeev jain and Mr.Rajiv Jain shareholders of the said companies, namely, M/s.Swift Global Private Limited and M/s. Swift Boutique Hotels Private Limited sold the shares to the defendants. It is further pleaded by the plaintiff that the defendant approached the plaintiff to settle the matter. Accordingly on 5.7.2016 an MOU was signed between the parties herein whereby the defendant agreed to make payment of Rs.6,30,00,000/- to the plaintiff company towards partial outstanding on or before 4.9.2016.

¶12

Learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff has also pointed out that

¶13

on 10.7.2017 in the earlier suit CS(OS)2854/2015 a decree was passed against the M/s.Shree Swastic Sales Corporation Private Limited for a sum of Rs.2,95,92,523/- after reducing the said sum of Rs.6.30,00,000/- which is subject matter of the MOU between the parties herein. Liberty was also granted to the plaintiff to initiate proceedings against the defendant for recovery of the balance amount under the MOU dated 5.7.2016 by order dated 10.07.2017.

¶14

After some arguments, learned counsel appearing for the defendant fairly states that the defendant has always been ready and willing to settle the matter with the plaintiff and it is only on account of certain apprehensions due to certain steps taken by the plaintiff that all the disputes have arisen. He fairly states that the defendants would like to pay the amount as per the MOU but are in a financially tight position. He also points out that out of Rs.6,30,00,000/-, Rs.4,34,45,000/- have been paid leaving the balance of Rs.1,95,55,000/-. He submits that he will pay the said amount in instalments spread over a period of six months to the plaintiff. He also submits that interest may be kept reasonable as the plaintiff has demanded very high rate of interest in the plaint.

¶15

After some arguments, learned counsel for the parties have agreed that a decree be passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant for a sum of Rs.1,95,55,000/-. The plaintiff shall also be entitled to Simple Interest @7% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till recovery. The suit is decreed as above.

¶16

Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that he will not execute the decree for a period of six months from today.

¶17

There is an interim order passed by this court dated 11.9.2017

¶18

whereby the defendants were restrained from selling, transferring or alienating the hotel property named as ‘The Clematis’ situated at Candolim Village, Taluka Bardez, North Goa, Goa State under Survey No.116/15, 117/12 & 117/11 or any portion thereof. The defendants have sought six months’ time to make payment of the decreetal amount. It is in the interest of justice that this restraint order would continue to operate till the payment is made by the defendant to the plaintiff. The defendant is, however, permitted to take steps for negotiation for sale of the said property. In case an agreement fructifies the defendant may deposit the decreetal amount in court. The moment the said amount is deposited in Court, interim order passed by this Court shall stand vacated.

¶19

Suit stands disposed of as above. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.

¶20

JAYANT NATH, J

¶21

DECEMBER 13, 2018 n

M/S Kauntum Papers Ltd. v. M/S Princess Choice Hotel Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Kauntum Papers Ltd. v. M/S Princess Choice Hotel Pvt. Ltd. & 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

Girish Mahant Vs Rajeev Kumar Lohia & Anr.

Jsl Limited Vs M/S Ariba India Pvt.Ltd. & Ors.

Shri Dharambir Singh Vs Shri Basant Singh

Smt Savita Sardana Vs Smt Satish Paul & Ors.

State Bank of India Vs M/S Kashyap Organics & Ors.

M/S Kushal Infraproject Industries (India) Ltd. Vs Umed Singh & Ors.

Gagan Berry Vs Vivek Berry & Anr.

Barati Dechasakphan Vs Anil Mangal & Anr.

Shri Dharambir Singh Vs Shri Basant Singh

Ramnath Iron & Steel Industries Vs Energo Engineering Projects Limited

Novi Digital Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs Muhammed Awais Rafiq & Ors.

Reliance Industries Limited & Anr. Vs Mr. Gagan Kohli & Ors.

Emami Limited Vs Abhishek Manufacturing Co. (India) Private Limited

Verizon Trademark Services Llc & Ors. Vs Mr. Idris Ahmed & Ors.