Partly allowed

Tamilnadu Industrial v. M/S.Mathias and Kalingeri

Madras HC11 Apr 2019OP/35/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a petition under the State Financial Corporation Act determining the liability of the respondents. The court found the claimed amount due and payable based on evidence and directed payment.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; deemed liability determined and directed against respondents 2 and 3 to pay Rs.4,27,84,860/- jointly and severally with interest; no costs.

Tamilnadu Industrial Vs M/S.Mathias and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 11.04.2019

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

¶6

O.P.No. 35 of 2012

¶7

The Tamilnadu Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd.,
Rep. By its Branch Manager, Tiruvallur Branch,
No.86 C & D II Main Road, Ambattur Industrial Estate,
Chennai – 600 058. ..Petitioner
Vs.
1.M/s. Mathias & Kalingeri Packaging Pvt Ltd.,
Rep. By its Director
2.I.J.Mathias
3.Regina Mathias ...Respondents

¶8

Prayer: Petition under Sec.31(a), 31(aa) and 32 of the State Financial Corporation's Act 1951 praying for determining the liability and direct the respondents 2 to 3 herein to pay jointly and severally a sum of Rs.4,27,84,860/(Rupees Four Crores Twenty Seven Lakhs Eighty Four Thousand Eight Hundred and Sixty Only) to the petitioner corporation with interest at the rate of 16% p.a. from the date of the petition to till the date of realization in full and awarding costs of the petition.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr. M.J.Jaseem Mohamed For Respondents : No Appearance

¶10

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶11

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

The petitioner/Tamil Nadu Industrial Investment Corporation Limited seeks an order to determine the liability of the respondents at Rs.4,27,84,860/-.

¶14

The first respondent is a company and respondents 2 and 3 are it's directors. The respondents have borrowed monies from the petitioner's Corporation and had availed various credit facilities. A total sum of Rs.37,25,000/- was sanctioned to the respondents. The respondents 2 and 3 have also guaranteed the repayment of the outstanding loans. Since the respondents failed and neglected to pay any monies as agreed to operation was forced to exercise at right under Section 31 of the State Financial Corporation Act for sale of the immovable property and machinery. The amounts realized by sale were given credit to under various accounts, leaving a balance of Rs.4,27,84,860/-.

¶15

Despite notice, the respondents did not appear either in person or through counsel, duly instructed. An Officer of the Corporation was examined as P.W.1, he has produced the original terms and conditions of loan as Ex.P2, original title deeds and loan documents as Exs.P3 to P11. Exs.P12 and P13 are

¶16

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶17

¶18

the notices and returned postal covers. Ex.P14 is the certified copy of statement of accounts sheets. The deeds of guarantee executed by the respondents 2 and 3 have also filed as Exs.P10 and P11.

¶19

From the above oral and documentary evidence, I find that the

¶20

petitioner/Corporation had established that the amount claimed in the original
petition is due and payable by the respondents. Hence, the original petition is
allowed as prayed for. No costs.
11.04.2019
kkn

¶21

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶22

¶23

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.

kkn

O.P.No. 35 of 2012

11.04.2019

http://www.judis.nic.in

Tamilnadu Industrial v. M/S.Mathias and Kalingeri

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tamilnadu Industrial v. M/S.Mathias and Kalingeri

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Murali and Another Vs M.Saroja and 2 Others

Mrs.G.Karpagam Vs Mr.Gurusamy

E.Selvarani W/O.P.Elumalai Vs S. Siva S/O.Shanmugam

O.S.Manian Vs Naveena Netrikkan, Tamil Weekly Magazine, Rep.by its Proprietor Editor and Publisher a.S.Mani

A.Loganathan Vs D.Shanthi

Rekha Anand Vs the Inspector of Police