Allowed

The Official Assigee v. S.Arjunlal Sunderdas

Madras HC12 Jul 2019APPLN/104/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an insolvency application, the court considered evidence that the second respondent received funds from the insolvent first respondent. Noting no discharge occurred, the court allowed the applicant's prayer for a judgment and decree against the non-participating second respondent.

What did the court decide?

Decree passed against the second respondent to pay Rs. 25,00,000/- with interest at 18% p.a. and costs.

The Official Assigee Vs S.Arjunlal Sunderdas — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

RESERVED ON: 28.06.2019

¶3

DATED: 12.07.2019

¶4

Appln.(IP)No. 104 of 2016 in I.P. No. 25 of 2014

¶5

Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J. & C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

¶6

This application had been filed by the Official Assignee seeking a Judgment and Decree against the second respondent, Najimudeen Majieed, Barnas Industrial, Valliammal Road, Vepery, Chennai – 600 007, to pay a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- with interest at 18% p.a., from 31.03.2013 till date of realisation with cost of the recovery proceedings.

¶7

2. The Official Assignee had stated that the second respondent had received a sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- from the first respondent/insolvent Arjunlal Sunderdas, which was shown as due and outstanding as on 31.03.2013. It was also stated that this amount was reflected in the accounts. There has been no subsequent transaction to prove discharge. The Official Assignee had issued notice calling upon the second respondent to pay the amount.

¶8

3. Notice was directed to the second respondent but he did not choose to participate in the judicial proceedings and therefore, the

¶9

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶10

¶11

second respondent was set ex-parte on 25.01.2018. Thereafter, the applicant was directed to take evidence.

¶12

4. Accordingly, A.S.Velumani, Sub Assistant Registrar attached to the office of the Official Assignee, High Court, Madras, filed proof affidavit and was examined as PW-1. He filed Exs. A-1 to A-5. Ex.A-1 is the certified copy of the relevant pages in the Auditor Ranga Ramanujam's Report dated 04.04.2013; Ex.A-2 is the certified copy of the relevant page in Auditor Annamalai Associates's Report; Ex.A-3 is the certified copy of the Notice sent by Official Assignee along with the acknowledgment card; Ex.A-4 is the certified copy of the enquiry notice sent by Official Assignee along with the acknowledgment card; Ex.A-5 is the certified copy of the relevant entries in the Schedule of Affairs (No.56). Thereafter, the first respondent namely, the insolvent, Arjunlal Sunderdas also appeared before the Court and filed his proof affidavit and was examined as RW-1. He also confirmed that the second respondent had borrowed a sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- on 31.03.2013 through RTGS. He affirmed that the second respondent had not paid any amount towards discharge.

¶13

5. In view of the above evidence, this Application is allowed and a decree is passed accordingly against the second respondent as prayed for.

¶14

vsg

¶15

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶16

¶17

Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J. & C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

¶18

vsg

¶19

Pre-Delivery Order made in
Appln.(IP)No. 104 of 2016
in
I.P. No. 25 of 2014

¶20

12.07.2019

¶21

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶22

¶23

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶24

¶25

http://www.judis.nic.in

The Official Assigee v. S.Arjunlal Sunderdas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Official Assigee v. S.Arjunlal Sunderdas

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

The Official Assignee Vs S.Arjunlal Sunderdas

The Official Assigee Vs S.Arjunlal Sunderdas

The Official Assigee Vs S.Arjunlal Sunderdas

The Official Assignee Vs Arjunlal Sunderdas

The Official Assignee Vs Arjunlal Sunderdas

The Official Assignee Vs S. Arjunlal Sunderdas