AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
I.A. 33134/2024 in O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 26/2023
By this application, the respondent in the present petition seeks an order of restraint against the petitioner, injuncting the petitioner from proceeding against the respondent in terms of letter dated 19 June 2024.
Mr. Pankaj Agarwal, learned Counsel for the submits that, by the letter dated 19 June 2024, the petitioner has sought to cancel the One Time Settlement (OTS) which was in force between the petitioner and the respondent and is taking consequential action against the respondent.
A perusal of the orders passed by this Court in the present petition clearly indicate that there is no ground whatsoever for this Court to grant any relief to the respondent.
The petitioner and the respondent had entered into a OTS dated 26 July 2023.
On 22 December 2023, the following order was passed:
“IA 26307/2023 – Int. dir.
1.Issue notice. Learned counsel for the petitioner accepts notice. He prays for and is granted two weeks' time to file a reply. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed before the next date.
2.Learned senior counsel for the respondents on instructions from Mr.Anirudh Banerjee, the sole proprietor of the respondent no.1 concern who is present in Court, submits that the respondents are conscious of their liability to pay the remaining outstanding dues of Rs.6 crores to the petitioner and undertake to pay the same on or before 01.02.2024. He further submits that in order to show their bona fide, the respondents will pay a sum of Rs.50 lakhs to the petitioner on or before 29.12.2023.
3.In the light of this stand taken by the respondents as also the fact that the matter was as recently as on 18.12.2023 at the joint request of the parties adjourned to 01.02.2024, so as to enable the parties to arrive at an amicable settlement, 1 am of the view that till the next date the petitioner ought to hold its hands. Consequently, the petitioner is, till the next date, restrained from taking any coercive steps against the respondents in furtherance of the letter dated 18.12.2023. This would however be subject to the respondents complying with their undertaking given to the Court today.
4.List on the date already fixed.”
Thus, on 22 December 2023, the respondent had acknowledged its liability to pay an outstanding amount of ₹ 6 crores to the petitioner and had clearly undertaken to effect the said payment on or before 1 February 2024, and it was believing the said undertaking that this Court directed the petitioner not to take any coercive steps against the respondent.
On 1 February 2024, this Court noted that, even of the amount of ₹ 50 lakhs which was required to be paid by the respondent on or before 29 December 2023, the respondent had only paid an amount of ₹ 25 lakhs on 29 December 2023. Learned Senior Counsel for the respondent informed the Court that the respondent was willing to pay a further amount of ₹ 1 crore and would also liquidate the remaining amount of ₹ 5 crores by 20 March 2024. Noting the said submission, this Court adjourned the matter to 16 February 2024, specifically observing, in para 6 of the order, that, if the assurance given to this Court was not honoured, the interim order in favour of the respondent would be liable to be vacated.
Thereafter, on 27 March 2024, the learned Counsel for the respondent once again assured the Court that the respondent was intending to honour the settlement. An undertaking was given to the Court that the entire remaining dues of the petitioner would be cleared by 30 April 2024.
At the same time, the petitioner intimated this Court that the OTS had come to an end by efflux of time and was no longer valid. The said fact is noted by this Court in para 6 of its order.
On 7 May 2024, the following order came to be passed:
“1.This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2.An affidavit of assets dated 7th May, 2024 has been handed over to the Court by ld. Counsel for the Respondent. The same is yet to be filed. A copy of the same has been served on the Plaintiff. Let the same be brought on record.
3.In terms of the said affidavit, there are various bank accounts and immovable properties.
4.Let the Respondent disclose the actual balances in all these bank accounts from items 1 to 13 as listed in paragraph 9 of the said affidavit. Both the parties shall disclose the market value of the properties listed under IV, V and VI as described in the said affidavit on the next date of hearing.
5.The Court would then consider the manner in which the equities are to be adjusted.
6.The interim order passed on 27th March, 2024 shall continue.
7.List on 12th August, 2024.”
Till date, despite repeated assurances to this Court, the dues of the petitioner have yet to be liquated. This Court has, on more than one occasion, observe that failure to liquidate the petitioner’s dues as undertaken to this Court would result ipso facto in vacating the interim protection granted to the respondent.
The respondent has clearly no interest or intent to liquidate the petitioner’s dues. It has defaulted, occasion after occasion, with the undertaking given to this Court.
There is no question of the respondent being entitled to any kind of interlocutory injunctive relief.
The OTS has come to an end by efflux of time on 30 April 2024. There is no question of now binding the petitioner down by any of its obligation under the OTS. No occasion, therefore, arises for this Court to show any leniency to the respondent.
This application is accordingly dismissed.