AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This is an application seeking exemption from filing the certified/ true typed/ translated copies of the dim and illegible annexures. The application is allowed subject to filing of legible copies within two weeks.
Main Appeal
This Appeal is against an impugned Order dated 2nd January, 2025 whereby an application for recall of an earlier Order dated 12th September, 2024 was rejected.
Vide Order dated 12th September, 2024, at the request of the Respondent, the Company namely Ms. F.M. Haemmerle Textiles Limited (FMHT, in short) was deleted from the array of the execution.
It is the submission of the learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant that FMHT was a proper and necessary party since as per the decree, the Appellant was to make payment for purchase of shares of MUT which MUT held in M/s. FMHT. It is alleged by the Appellant that M/s. FMHT went into CIRP and shares of both MUT as well as VPL have since been extinguished. However, this is not a dispute before us and we do not intend to say anything on it. Suffice to say since the shares of M/s. FMHT were to be purchased by the Appellant, hence it cannot be said M/s. FMHT is not necessary and proper party before the learned executing Court. We have also heard the learned Counsel for the Respondent wherein it is submitted they had made their best efforts to serve M/s. FMHT including by publication but since M/s. FMHT was not coming forward before the learned executing Court, they made a statement they do not intend to take execution any further against M/s. FMHT.
The learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant says the address of the FMHT as given in the execution application is similar to the address of the VPL – the Appellant herein. However, if one peruse the master data of FMHT (page 572), the correct address of FMHT is given as “Office no.4, 2nd Floor, Guru Har Rai Complex, Industries Estate Road, Near Manju Cinem, aDholewal, Ludhiana, Ludhiana, Punjab, India 141003”, hence it is one of the submissions of the learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant no service is done as per the master data.
Considering the above, it would be appropriate the Order dated 12th September, 2024 is recalled to an extent M/s. FMHT shall remain as Respondent No.2 before the executing Court and the executing Court may now serve the said Respondent at the address as above, given in the master data.
Since the learned Counsel for the Respondent says there has been much delay, it would be appropriate if the proceedings are concluded expeditiously by the learned NCLT in a time bound manner, hence on service of M/s. FMHT, the learned NCLT may endeavour to complete the proceedings before it within eight weeks thereof.
With these observations, we dispose of the Appeal. The pending applications are also disposed of.
Needless to say anything stated above shall not affect the merits of the case before the learned executing Court.