Allowed

Yes Bank Limited v. Nel Holdings South Limited

Karnataka HC18 Apr 2023WP/15525/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition was disposed of after the parties filed a joint memo recording a settlement regarding the recovery of funds from a fixed deposit. The court allowed an interim application to recall the earlier judgment based on this compromise.

What did the court decide?

Application in I.A.No.1/2023 allowed; judgment dated 1.9.2022 recalled; Writ Petition disposed off in terms of the settlement in the Joint Memo.

Yes Bank Limited Vs Nel Holdings South Limited — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 15525 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 15525 OF 2022 (GM-DRT)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

YES BANK LIMITED, A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, AND A BANKING COMPANY UNDER SECTION 5(C) OF THE BANKING REGULATION ACT, 1949, WITH ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT: FIRST FLOOR, PRESTIGE OBELISK, KASTURBA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001, AND ALSO AT YES BANK HOUSE, OFF WESTERN EXPRESS HIGHWAY, SANTACRUZ EAST, MUMBAI-400 055, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED PERSON. …PETITIONER

¶10

Digitally signed (BY SMT. POORNIMA HATTI.,ADVOCATE) by CHETAN B C AND: Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA 1. NEL HOLDINGS SOUTH LIMITED.,

¶11

NEL HOLDINGS SOUTH LIMITED., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 WITH CORPORATE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER L93000KA2004PLC033412 AND REGISTERED OFFICE AT: 7^TH FLOOR, NITESH TIMES SQUARE, NO.8, M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.

¶12

¶13

WP No. 15525 of 2022

¶14

NITESH INDIRANAGAR RETAIL PVT. LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 WITH CORPORATE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER U45201KA2007PTC042660 AND REGISTERED OFFICE AT: 7^TH FLOOR, NITESH TIMES SQUARE, NO.8, M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.

¶15

MR. GEORGE THANGIAH (DECEASED) REPRESENTED THROUGH HIS LR

¶16

VIJAY SHEKAR THANGIAH, S/O. LATE MR. GEORGE THANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 6, COMMISSARIAT ROAD, BENGALURU-560 025.

¶17

RACHEL CHITRA PRABHAKAR, W/O. MR. SATHI PRABHAKAR, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.6, COMMISSARIAT ROAD, BENGALURU-560 025.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SMT. LATHA S SHETTY.,ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. UDAYA HOLLA., SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. M S RAJENDRA., ADVOCATE FOR R2; SMT. PRIYA KALE., ADVOCATE FOR R3 & R4)

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT ALLOWING INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2260/2022 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL BANGALORE ON 1.8.2022 SEEKING ATTACHMENT BEFORE JUDGEMENT AND PASS AN ORDER ATTACHING THE FIXED DEPOSIT OF INR 58,20,30,240 KEPT AT THE BANK OF INDIA, INDIRA NAGAR BRANCH WHOSE FD CERTIFICATES ARE DEPOSITED WITH THE HONBLE COMMERCIAL COURT (CCH-89) IN COM.EX. 178/2022 VIDE ANNEXURES-M AND P AND ETC.,

¶21

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

¶23

WP No. 15525 of 2022

¶24

ORDER

¶25

This Writ Petition was disposed off vide judgment dated 1.9.2022. Application in I.A.No.1/2023, supported by an affidavit, has now been moved by the 2^nd respondent whereby recall of the said judgment is sought for.

¶26

Learned Sr. Advocate Sri.Udaya Holla appearing

¶27

for the applicant submits that since the lis is completely & amicably resolved between the parties, and to that effect, a Joint Memo dated 15.4.2023 has also been filed. In light

¶28

of this, the application in I.A.No.1/2023 be allowed and the Writ Petition be disposed off in terms of the settlement as recorded in the said Joint Memo, which reads as under:

¶29

“The parties herein submit this joint memo as follows:

¶30

That the present WP. No. 15525/2022 was filed by the Petitioner, being the assignor of financial assets pertaining to the Respondent No.1 in favour of JCFARC, for seeking direction to the Hon'ble Debt Recovery Tribunal Bangalore (DRT Bangalore) to pass an order in an Interim Application bearing No. 2260 of 2022 for attachment of Fixed Deposit of an amount of Rs. 58,20,30,240/- (Rupees FiftyEight Crores Twenty Lakhs Thirty Thousand

¶31

¶32

WP No. 15525 of 2022

¶33

Two Hundred and Forty Only) kept at Bank of India, Indira Nagar Branch whose FD Certificate(s) be deposited with the Hon'ble Commercial Court (CCH-89) in Commercial Execution Petition No. 178 of 2022.

¶34

This Hon'ble Court vide its order dated 1st September 2022 granted an interim stay on withdrawal of the aforesaid Fixed Deposit amount by Respondents (by directing the Commercial Court to not to disburse the amount deposited in Commercial Execution Petition No.178 of 2022) and further directed the DRT Bangalore to consider and dispose of the Interim Application (IA No.2260 of 2022) of the Petitioner within three weeks' time.

¶35

In the meanwhile the Central Government vide its Notification dated 4th October 2022 has realigned the jurisdiction of Debt Recovery Tribunals pertaining to Original applications involving debt amount of Rs. 100 crores and above. Accordingly, the Original Application (along with the Interim Applications) filed by the Petitioner were thus transferred and still pending on file with the DRT Chennai.

¶36

Subsequently, the Original Petitioner i.e. YES Bank Limited has assigned financial assets pertaining to the Respondent No. 1 together with all its right, title, interest therein along with the security created therefor in favour of JCFARC vide Assignment Agreement dated 16th December 2022 under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. Pursuant to the Assignment Agreement read with the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, JCF ARC is deemed to be a secured lender to the Respondent No. 1 and is legally entitled to the loans or any part thereof

¶37

¶38

WP No. 15525 of 2022

¶39

and to receive all amounts due and take all such other actions and to initiate, continue, enforce, and/or defend all legal proceedings of any nature (civil/criminal) as may be required for the purpose of recovery of the loans. Accordingly, JCF ARC has filed the requisite Substitution Applications before the respective Tribunal/Courts in order to substitute JCFARC in place of YES Bank Limited.

¶40

Now, the parties to present Writ Petition have arrived at a settlement to the issues raised in this Petition as follows;

¶41

a) The Respondents have agreed that out of the attached Fixed Deposit amount, Rs. 15,00,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Crores Only) to be paid to JCFARC immediately by issuing an Demand Draft/RTGS instruction in favour of the Petitioner/J.C. Flowers Asset Reconstruction Private Limited, acting in its capacity as Trustee of JCF YES Trust 2022-23/15. Accordingly, directions may be given to the Hon'ble Commercial Court, before whom the Execution Petition No. 178/2022 is pending.

¶42

b) The remaining amounts of Rs. 43,20,30,240 (Rupees Forty Three Crores twenty lacs thirty thousand two hundred and forty Only) plus any accumulated interest if any, can be transferred by RTGS to the designated account of the 2nd Respondent as provided in Execution Petition No. 178/2022.

¶43

It is prayed that this Hon'ble court be pleased to take this joint memo on record and to record the settlement terms in respect to the amounts lying in the registry of the Commercial Court accordingly and direction to be

¶44

¶45

WP No. 15525 of 2022

¶46

given/passed to the Commercial Court (CCH-89) Bangalore and to the parties herein accordingly.”

¶47

The advocates appearing for the other respondents

¶48

do not have objection for recording the compromise.

¶49

A perusal of the application coupled with the

¶50

Joint Memo warrants an opinion be recorded that the settlement is in the best interest of the parties and that there is no legal or factual impediment for recording the same and deciding the lis of the parties amicably and once for all.

¶51

In view of the above, the application in I.A.No.1/2023 is allowed and the judgment dated 1.9.2022 stands recalled; the Writ Petition is disposed off

¶52

in terms of the settlement as recorded in the Joint Memo above.

¶53

Costs made easy.

¶54

Sd/JUDGE

¶55

cbc

Yes Bank Limited v. Nel Holdings South Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yes Bank Limited v. Nel Holdings South Limited

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

Sri K S Yadiyur Sidalingeswara Swamy Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Jayamma Vs the Commissioner

Sri Shankaranna Vs the State of Karnatak a

Mr. M. Mahadevaiah Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. N. Krishnappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. K. S. Lalithamma Vs the State of Karnataka