Dismissed

Infrastructure Leasing & Finan v. 1.M/S.FIDELITY Industries Ltd.

Madras HC5 Jul 2021CS/739/2000

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses a money recovery suit by Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services Limited against four defendants. The High Court held that nothing survived in the suit as defendants were insolvent, liquidated, or had been struck out years prior, ruling that continuing the proceedings served no purpose.

What did the court decide?

The suit in C.S.No.739 of 2000 was dismissed under Order XIII A Rule 3(a) CPC and costs were denied.

Infrastructure Leasing & Finan Vs 1.M/S.FIDELITY Industries… — Money Laundering | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

/ 1 /

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

(ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION)

¶4

MONDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JULY 2021

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

¶6

C.S..No.739 of 2000 AND

¶7

O.A.No.709 OF 2005

¶8

C.S.No.739 of 2000:-

¶9

Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services Limited ITC Center, Ground Floor, 759 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002. represented by its Authorised Signatory

¶10

...Plaintiff

¶11

Versus

¶12

1.Official Liquidater, High Court, Madras,

¶13

Liquidator of M/s.Fidelity Industries Ltd., (in Liquidation) I Floor, Kuralagam, Chennai-600 104.

¶14

2.Mr.Ashok Muthanna, Managing Director M/s.Fidelity Industries Ltd., Aarthi Chambers, III Floor, 189 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 006.

¶15

3.M/s. Nakshatra Trading Pvt.Ltd.,

¶16

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶17

E/80, Srinagar Co-op. Housing society,

¶18

/ 2 /

¶19

P.L.Lokhande Marg, Pestom Sagar, Chembur, Mumbai 400 070.

¶20

4.M/s.Samjhota Capital and Savings Finance Pvt.Ltd., 45/47, Bank of Maharashtra Building, Bombay Samachar Marg, Mumbai 400 023. (Amended as per order dated 13.08.2004 passed by the Hon'ble Mr.Justice S.K. Krishuan in Appln.No.3057 of 2004 in C.S.No.739 of 2000)

¶21

...Defendant

¶22

Civil Suit praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass a Judgement and decree jointly and serverally against the First to the Fourth Defendants directing (a) to pay a sum of 8,96,89,683/- (Rupees Eight Crores Ninety Six Lakhs Eighty Nine Thousand Six Hundred and Eighty Three only) together with interest at 24% per annum on Rs.7,00,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Crores only) with quarterly rests from the date of plaint till date of payment to be realised inter alia by repossession and sale of the hypothecated assets and the pledged shares more particularly described in the Schedules 'A', 'B' and 'C' hereunder respectively; and

¶23

(b) on the failure to recover the moneys through repossession and sale as referred to in prayer (a) above, direct the First and Second Defendants to

¶24

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ pay the decree amount less the amount realised by repossession and sale as

per prayer(a);

/ 3 /

A.No.709 OF 2005:-

¶29

M/s.Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services Limited 3^rd Floor, Wescare Towers, No.16, Cenotaph Road, Teynampet, Chennai-600 018 Represented by its Authorised Signatory

¶30

...Applicant/Plaintiff

¶31

Versus

¶32

Official Liquidater, High Court, Madras, as the Liquidatoror of M/s.Fidelity Industries Limited (in liquidation), First Floor, Kuralagam, Chennai-600 104.

¶33

2.Mr.Ashok Muthanna, Managing Director M/s.Fidelity Industries Ltd., Aarthi Chambers, III Floor, 189 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 006.

¶34

3.M/s. Nakshatra Trading Pvt.Ltd.,

¶35

E/80, Srinagar Co-op. Housing society, P.L.Lokhande Marg, Pestom Sagar, Chembur, Mumbai 400 070.

¶36

4.M/s.Samjhota Capital and Savings Finance Pvt.Ltd., 45/47, Bank of Maharashtra Building, Bombay Samachar Marg, Mumbai 400 023.

¶37

...Defendants/Respondents

¶38

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶39

/ 4 /

¶40

A.No.709 OF 2005:-

¶41

Original Application praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to permit the Applicant to possess the Hypothecated Assets which are more fully described in Schedules A and B to the Judge's Summons and to sell the same, in terms of Clause 8 of the Deeds of Hypothecation dated 28.10.1998 and 4.2.1999 and apply the net proceeds of such sale towards its suit claim in C.S.No.739 of 2000 pending on the file.

¶42

This suit along with the application coming on this day before this court for hearing in the presence of Mr.Manoj Menon for M/s.V.Nataraj, S.Ragunathan and P.V.Sabaridas, Advocates for the plaintiff in C.S.No.739 of 2000 and for the applicant in A.No.709 of 2005 and upon reading the plaint filed in C.S.No.739 of 2000 and the order dated 25/01/2008 made in A.No.709 of 2005 and the counsel for the Plaintiff having submitted that the 1^st defendant has been wound up and the 2^nd defendant has been declared insolvent and the suit against the defendants 3&4 has already been dismissed by the learned Master on 14.10.2008 and it is therefore clear that nothing survives in the suit and this court does not find any chance of success for the plaintiff and no purpose will be served by keeping the suit

¶43

pending. It is ordered as follows:-

¶44

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶45

/ 5 /

¶46

That the suit in C.S.No.739 of 2000, be and is hereby dismissed under

¶47

Rule 3(a) of order XIIIA of the code of civil procedure as amended by the

¶48

Commercial Courts, Act 2015.

¶49

That the A.No.709 of 2005 do stand closed.

¶50

That there shall be no costs of this suit.

¶51

WITNESS THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE, HIGH COURT AT MADRAS AFORESAID, THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JULY 2021.

¶52

Sd./-

¶53

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (Comm.Cases) //Certified to be true copy//

¶54

Dated at Madras this the day of 2021.

¶55

COURT OFFICER(O.S.)

¶56

From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments.

¶57

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶58

/ 6 /

¶59

VSP 09/08/2021

¶60

C.S.No.739 OF 2000 AND

O.A.No.709 OF 2005

ORDER

DATED: 05.07.2021

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

¶65

APPROVAL ON:08/10/2021

¶66

APPROVED ON:20/10/2021

¶67

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶68

/ 7 /

¶69

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶70

DATED : 05.07.2021

¶71

CORAM

¶72

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

¶73

C.S.No.739 of 2000

¶74

and

¶75

A.No.709 of 2005

¶76

Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services Limited ITC Center Ground Floor 759 Anna Salai Chennai 600 002 represented by its Authorised Signatory.

¶77

...Plaintiff

¶78

.Vs.

¶79

1.Official Liquidator, High Court Madras Liquidator of M/s.Fidelity Industries Ltd., (in liquidation) I Floor, Kuralagam,

¶80

Chennai – 600 104.

¶81

2.Ashok Muthanna

¶82

3.M/s.Nakshatra Trading Pvt. Ltd.,

¶83

E/80, Srinagar Co-op. Housing Society P.L.Lokhande Marg Pestom Sagar Chembur Mumbai 400 070.

¶84

4.M/s.Samjhota Capital and Savings Finance Pvt. Ltd., 45/47, Bank of Maharashtra Building https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Bombay Samachar Marg Mumbai 400 023.

¶85

... Defendants

¶86

/ 8 /

¶87

Plaint filed under Order VII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil

¶88

Procedure read with Order IV Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules praying for a judgment and decree directing the defendants:

¶89

(a) to pay a sum of Rs.8,96,89,683/- (Rupees Eight Crores Ninety Six Lakhs Eighty Nine Thousand Six Hundred and Eighty Three only) together with interest at 24% per annum on Rs.7,00,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Crores only) with quarterly rests from the date of plaint till date of payment to be realised inter alia by repossession and sale of the hypothecated assets and the pledged shares more particularly described in the Schedule 'A', 'B' and 'C' hereunder respectively;

¶90

(b) on the failure to recover the money through repossession and sale as referred to in prayer (a) above, direct the first and second defendants to pay the decree amount less the amount realised by repossession and sale as per prayer (a) and

¶91

¶92

For Plaintiff : Mr.Manoj Menon for Mr.V.Nataraj

¶93

¶94

J U D G M E N T

¶95

The suit has been filed by the plaintiff seeking for a decree and

¶96

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶97

judgment directing the defendants

¶98

/ 9 /

¶99

¶100

(b) on the failure to recover the money through repossession and sale

¶101

as referred to in prayer (a) above, direct the first and second defendants to pay the decree amount less the amount realised by repossession and sale as per prayer (a) and

¶102

¶103

2. Mr.Manoj Menon, learned counsel representing M/s.V.Natraj, S.Raghunathan and P.V.Sabaridas, learned counsel for the plaintiff would submit that the 1^st defendant has been wound up and the 2^nd defendant has been declared insolvent. The suit against the defendants 3 and 4 has already been dismissed by the learned Master on 14.10.2008.

¶104

3. It is therefore clear that nothing survives in the suit. I do not find

¶105

any chance of success for the plaintiff and no purpose will be served by https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ keeping the suit pending. The suit is therefore dismissed under Rule 3(a) of

¶106

/ 10 /

¶107

Order XIII A of the Code of Civil Procedure as amended by the Commercial

¶108

Courts Act, 2015. No costs. Consequently the connected application is also closed.

¶109

Sd./-R.S.M.J 05.07.2021

¶110

List of the witnesses examined on the side of the plaintiff : Nil List of Exhibits marked on the side of the plaintiff : Nil List of the witnesses examined on the side of the defendants: Nil List of Exhibits marked on the side of the defendants: Nil

¶111

Sd./-R.S.M.J 05.07.2021 //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2021.

¶112

COURT OFFICER(O.S.)

¶113

From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.

¶114

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Infrastructure Leasing & Finan v. 1.M/S.FIDELITY Industries Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Infrastructure Leasing & Finan v. 1.M/S.FIDELITY Industries Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs.Latha Raghavan alias Swarna Latha and 3 others Vs Mr.S.R.Srinivasan

The Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax, Presently, The Deputy Commissioner of GST Vs The Official Liquidator

Hitesh Jabak Vs Kishendas Chabra & Co.

Mr. Champalal Vs B. v.Saraswathy

The Official Assignee Vs Dr.R.Ashokan

M/S.Allure Fashions Vs Mr Prabir Roy