AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The present Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order dated 27.04.2022 passed in I.A.No.302 of 2022 in COS No.38 of 2016 by the learned Judge, Principal Special Court in the cadre of District Judge for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes, Hyderabad, allowing the I.A. filed by the respondent herein pursuant to the order passed by this Court in I.A.No.2 of 2022 in COM.C.A.No.1 of 2022, dated 09.03.2022.
The main ground on which the present CRP is filed is that the learned Judge has erred in allowing I.A.No.2 of 2022 in COM.C.A.No.1 of 2022, dated 09.03.2022, which purportedly permits the respondent No.1 herein to withdraw the amount deposited to the credit of C.O.S.No.38 of 2016 by furnishing the agreement of sale-cum-G.P.A. as a security.
When the matter came up for admission, this Court vide order dated 05.05.2022 has suspended the impugned order dated 27.04.2022 till the next date of hearing. Seeking to vacate the said order, the respondent herein filed I.A No.3 of 2022.
The learned counsel for the respondent has stated that the respondent is willing to furnish 100% bank guarantee for withdrawing the amount deposited in the lower Court to the credit of C.O.S.No.38 of 2016 instead of the Agreement of Sale-cum-G.P.A., therefore, the CRP may be disposed of modifying the impugned order dated 27.04.2022. That, instead of furnishing the land, which was purchased vide Agreement Of Sale cum General Power of Attorney, as security, the respondent may be permitted to withdraw the said amount of Rs.36,73,38,886/-deposited to the credit of the C.O.S.No.38 of 2016 by furnishing 100% bank guarantee. The learned counsel has also stated that the General Power of Attorney, dated 29.07.2008 executed by M/s.NCCL, M/s.IVRCL and M/s.SMC is still subsisting and in view of the same, the GPA holder, M/s.Nagarjuna Construction Company Limited, is entitled to withdraw the said amount.
Even though the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has opposed the very maintainability of the vacate stay petition stating that one of the consortium partners of the respondent company i.e., IVRCL Limited has already been liquidated by the National Company Law Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad, vide order, dated 26.07.2019, and the Resolution Professional has been appointed and therefore, IVRCL Limited can only be represented by the Official Liquidator and not by the respondent. Further, the learned counsel has stated that the petitioner has no objection for withdrawal of the amount by the respondent in case the respondent furnishes 100% Bank Guarantee to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
As seen from the record, the suit has been filed by the respondent before the Principal Special Court in the Cadre of District Judge for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes, Hyderabad, which was numbered as COS No.38 of 2016. The Special Court vide judgment, dated 10.06.2021, has decreed the suit filed by the respondent No.1 herein and against which, the petitioner herein has filed COM.C.A.No.1 of 2022. Pursuant to the orders of this Court, dated 09.03.2022, the petitioner has deposited 50% of the total amount along with interest as well as costs. Even by the date of the said order, the order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, was in operation but the petitioner has not taken the said objection at any point of time except now. If at all there is any inter se dispute between the consortium partners, it is for the consortium partners to work out their remedies if they are so aggrieved but not for the petitioner to take such objection at this juncture.
Having regard to the above, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of directing the lower court to permit the respondent/plaintiff to withdraw the amount of Rs.36,73,38,886/- subject to the condition of the respondent furnishing 100% bank guarantee from any nationalized bank.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
There shall be no order as to costs.