Anoop Kumar Jindal And Anr vs Rakesh Kumar Jindal & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 392 Cal/2

OD-3

                    IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                        Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
                              ORIGINAL SIDE

                               APOT/71/2021
                                   WITH
                                AP/80/2021

                            IA NO:GA/1/2021
                      ANOOP KUMAR JINDAL AND ANR.
                                   VS.
                      RAKESH KUMAR JINDAL & ORS.


  BEFORE:
  The Hon'ble JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI
            AND
  The Hon'ble JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN
  Date : 16th April, 2021.
     [VIA VIDEO CONFERENCE]



                                                    Mr. Utpal Bose, Sr. adv.,
                                          Mr. Aniruddha Mitra, Adv...appear.

              Mr. Mr. Rupak Ghosh, Mr. Ajit Kumar Chaubey, Mr. Ayan Dutta,
                            Mr. Noorul Islam, Ms. Srijani Das, Advs...appear.

                                               Mr. Sudip Deb, Adv...appears.


       The Court : This appeal from the judgment and order dated 5th

March, 2021 of a learned single judge of this Court in an application under

section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is formally admitted.

       As the respondents are represented by learned counsel issuance and

service of the notice of appeal is dispensed with. We dispense with all other

formalities and expedite the hearing of the appeal.

Advocate on record of the appellants will prepare an informal paper

book and file the same in this Court by 21st May, 2021.

List the appeal for hearing on 14th June, 2021.

The learned single judge has specifically held that Mr. Utpal Bose's

client had paid "the corporation tax liability of the immovable property

concerned by availing of the waiver scheme".

It is nobody's case that the money was not paid to the corporation or

not on account of the property in question. Therefore, we see no reason to

stay that part of the order directing the Receiver to disburse Rs.20 lac out of

the funds in his hands to Mr. Bose's client as ad hoc payment towards the

corporation tax liability of Rs.44,42,123/-.

There is some substance in the contention of Mr. Deb. We direct the

Receiver to scrutinise the bills and receipts with respect to the payment of

Rs.44,42,123/- and to apportion liability for this amount of the parties on

the basis of their shareholding.

The Receiver shall prepare a report with which should be annexed a

statement of account reflecting the figure and also the liability of each

party, taking into account the reimbursement of Rs.20 lac made to Mr.

Bose's client in terms of this order. The Receiver shall file a report by 9th

June, 2021.

The direction in the impugned order upon Mr. Ghosh's client and Mr.

Deb's client to "pay short fall to the petitioner" is stayed for the time being.

The connected application is disposed of.

All observations are tentative and the directions contained in this

order are interim in nature without prejudice to the rights of the parties in

the section 34 application.

(I. P. MUKERJI, J.)

( MD. NIZAMUDDIN, J. )

pkd.