Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Uttar Pradesh State Cement Corporation Ltd. and Ors.

Appeal Dy. No. 159/2022 Date: 20.02.2023

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited Vs. Uttar Pradesh State Cement Corporation Ltd.

Present: Shri Anurag Khanna, Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri O. P. Mishra, counsel for the appellant Bank. , Shri D. N. Awasthi, counsel for the respondent No. 1, None for the respondent-OL Ex-parte against the respondents Nos. 3 to 6,, None for the respondent no. 7,

Heard the learned counsels for the parties in part.

The main contention of the appellant is that the Recovery Officer could not go behind the decree passed by the Tribunal below. Secondly, it is contended that the order has been passed by misreading the correct facts. Thirdly, there was no one time settlement, therefore, the observation in that regard is also not sustainable. Learned counsel for the appellant shall file written submission along with the citations in support of his contention by the next date.

Learned counsel for the respondent-State of U.P. submits that once whatever amount has been paid to the appellant-bank in liquidation proceedings, that has attained finality and no further amount can be claimed. The next contention is that under section 128 of the Contract Act, if the principal borrower is not in existence and all the assets have been auctioned/sold, then personal guarantee will not continue thereafter. The learned counsel submits that he shall also file written submission along with the citations in support of his contention by the next date.

List this case for further hearing on 17.03.2023. Till then the interim order, if any, shall continue.