Dismissed

Puravankara Limited v. Galaxy Properties Pvt.Ltd

Madras HC11 Mar 2024OSA/144/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appellant challenged an order allowing the respondent to withdraw the entire arbitral award amount deposited in court. The Division Bench found the appeal an abuse of process, noting the award had been confirmed up to the Supreme Court, and dismissed it with costs.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed; costs of Rs.1,00,000/- imposed on appellant within ten days; Registry directed to pay out deposited monies with accrued interest to respondent within one week.

Puravankara Limited Vs Galaxy Properties Pvt.Ltd — Execution and Attachment | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

O.S.A. No.144 of 2020

¶2

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 11.03.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL

¶7

O.S.A.No.144 of 2020 and

¶8

C.M.P.Nos.6829 of 2020 & 12333 of 2022

¶9

Puravankara Limited, (Formerly known as Puravankara Projects Limited) Having its registered office at 131/1, Ulsoor Road, Bangalore – 560 042. Represented by its Authorized Signatory and Senior Vice President – Legal John S. Vijayakumar

¶10

... Appellant

¶11

Vs.

¶12

M/s.Galaxy Properties Pvt. Ltd., Having its registered office at No.8, Old No.49, Radha Mohan Street, Velachery, Chennai – 600 042. Represented by its Directors Mohammed Ibrahim ... Respondent

¶13

Prayer : Original Side Appeal filed under Order XXXVI Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules read with Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside the judgment and decree dated 21.02.2020 in Application No.227 of 2020

¶14

1/5

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

O.S.A. No.144 of 2020

¶17

passed by this Court.

¶18

For Appellant : Mr.Joshua Samvel For Respondent : Mr.T.V.Ramanujam, Senior Counsel for M/s.Aravind Srivatsa

¶19

¶20

J U D G M E N T

¶21

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.)

¶22

There is absolutely no merit in this appeal. This appeal according to

¶23

us is an abuse of process of Court. Admittedly the appellant suffered an award for payment of Rs.11.90 Crores with appropriate interest which has been confirmed upto the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶24

2. The appellant had pretended to be a very good Company and made an offer to deposit a portion of the award amount contending that the sister concerns of the respondent owes monies to it. Thereby it conferred itself the power of being an adjudicator of its own claims against the sister concerns of the respondent.

¶25

3. However, when an application was moved for winding up the appellant before the National Company Law Tribunal, an offer was made by

¶26

2/5

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

O.S.A. No.144 of 2020 the appellant before the National Company Law Tribunal to deposit the remaining amount into the Court and the respondent was lured into withdrawing the application for winding up before the National Company Law Tribunal. After getting an order from National Company Law Tribunal the appellant now objects to withdrawal of the monies by the respondent which is due to it under the award which has been confirmed upto the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. This action of the appellant is most unpalatable to say the least.

¶29

4. If the appellant has any claim against the sister concerns, it is open to it to take appropriate action for recovery and there are various remedies available to it under the Code of Civil Procedure for securing its interest. We are not here to advice the appellant as to what to do to secure its interest. The learned Single Judge has rightly seen through the game played by the appellant and has ordered payment out of entire amount of the respondent.

¶30

5. We do not see any merits in the appeal. The appeal therefore fails

¶31

and it is accordingly dismissed with a costs of Rs.1,00,000/- to be paid within a period of ten days.

¶32

3/5

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

O.S.A. No.144 of 2020

¶35

6. The Registry is directed to pay out the monies lying to the credit of

¶36

the A.No.227 of 2020 along with the accrued interest within a period of one

¶37

week from today. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶38

(R.S.M., J.) (R.S.V., J.) 11.03.2024 dsa Index : No Internet : Yes Neutral Citation : No Speaking order

¶39

Note: - Issue order copy by 14.03.2024.

¶40

4/5

¶41

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶42

O.S.A. No.144 of 2020

¶43

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J. and R.SAKTHIVEL, J.

¶44

dsa

¶45

O.S.A.No.144 of 2020

¶46

11.03.2024

¶47

5/5

¶48

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Puravankara Limited v. Galaxy Properties Pvt.Ltd

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Puravankara Limited v. Galaxy Properties Pvt.Ltd

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

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Neetha Kushal

The Managing Director Vs Anjaneyelu

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Lakshmi (Deceased) 1. Narayanan

Nellai Concrete Products and Constructions Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India

Icci Lombard General Insurance Company Limited Vs Rajamma

Fairdeal Supplies Ltd. Vs the Official Liquidator