Citation : 2012 Latest Caselaw 5470 Del
Judgement Date : 12 September, 2012
$~34
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Judgment:12.9.2012
+ CA No.425/2007 in C.P. No.265/1998
RESERVE BANK OF INDIA ...........Petitioner
Through: Mr.A.K.Babbar, Advocate for the
applicant.
Ms.Swati Setia, Advocate for the
RBI.
Versus
M/S JVG FINANCE LTD. ...........Respondent
Through: Mr.Rajiv Bahl, Advocate for the
Official Liquidator.
Mr.Shailendra Singh, Advocate
for Mr.V.K.Sharma, Ex-Director
of JVG Finance Ltd.
Mr.V.K.Tandon, Advocate for
EOW.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR
INDERMEET KAUR, J. (Oral)
1 The applicant is Anup Rawla; his submission is that he is in legal
possession of 40 Indira Vikas Patras (IVPs) No.58 C 036541 to 036580
valued at Rs.5,000/- each; these IVPs had been given to him by M/s
Hoffland Finance Ltd. as a security for a loan which had been advanced
by the applicant to M/s Hoffland Finance Ltd.; the loan advanced by
him to M/s Hoffland Finance Ltd. was Rs.1,70,000/-; this was on
12.7.1997. Submission is that pursuant to an advertisement issued on
12.6.1997 by M/s Hoffland Finance Ltd. he had given a loan of
Rs.1,70,000/- to the said company. Receipt of the aforenoted amount by
M/s Hoffland Finance Ltd. dated 12.6.1997 is on record; this amount is
also reflected in the bank account of the applicant showing that a sum of
Rs.1,70,000/- has been paid to M/s Hoffland Finance Ltd. Cheque
issued by M/s Hoffland Finance Ltd. in the sum of Rs.30,600/- dated
12.9.1998 as part payment stood dishonoured. The 40 IVPs in physical
possession of the applicant in the denomination of Rs.5000/- each are
also on record. Submission of the applicant that he is entitled to get
these IVPs encashed and the objections raised by the Official Liquidator
has no merit in view of the fact that the applicant was a bonafide holder
of this negotiable instrument; the rules and procedure for encashment of
an IVP's clearly show that whoever is the holder of the IVP is entitled to
the amount contained therein. At the time when this transaction took
place between the applicant and the M/s Hoffland Finance Ltd. which
was in April 1997 there was no proceedings for the winding up of M/s
Hoffland Finance Ltd.
2 The objections raised by the Official Liquidator in his reply have
been perused. Submission is that in terms of the report of the SFIO it
has been noted that these IVPs have been purchased out of the fund of
JVG Finance Limited which is a company in liquidation; the Managing
Director of JVG Finance is Mr.V.K.Sharma who is none other but
brother of Mr.B.B.Sharma who is Managing Director of M/s Hoffland
Finance Ltd. Mr.B.B.Sharma has no authority to deal with the IPVs
which had been purchased out of the fund of the JVG Finance Ltd.
3 The report of the SFIO is on record. In this report it has been
clearly been stated that the IVPs (subject matter of the present petition)
had been purchased out of the funds of M/s JVG Finance Ltd. There is
also no dispute to the factum that Mr.B.B.Sharma, Chairman of M/s
Hoffland Finance Ltd. is elder brother of Mr.V.K.Sharma who is
Managing Director of M/s JVG Finance Ltd. The report of the SFIO
goes on to state that since the financial position of M/s JVG Finance
Ltd. was not good it had passed on these IVPs to M/s Hoffland Finance
Ltd. and M/s Hoffland Agro who in turn collected the money against the
IPVs. M/s Hoffland Finance Ltd. was wound up on 03.4.2003.
Advertisement effected by M/s Hoffland Finance Ltd. on 12.6.1997
inviting investments from public is on record; pursuant thereto the
applicant had paid a sum of Rs.1,70,000/- to the company which was a
bonafide investment made by an innocent and bonafide person; he was
unaware of any interse clandestine dealings between the two brothers
i.e. Mr.V.K.Sharma, Managing Director of M/s JVG Finance Ltd. and
Mr.B.B.Sharma, Managing Director of M/s Hoffland Finance Ltd.. The
IPVs are in physical possession of the applicant. He is a "holder in due
course" in terms of Section 9 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
"Holder in due course" means any person who for consideration became
the possessor of a promissory note, bills of exchange or cheque if
payable to bearer. In the instant case the applicant has become a holder
for consideration; these IVPs have been handed over to him by M/s
Hoffland Finance Ltd. for the loan of Rs.1,70,000/- which he had
advanced and which is evident from the documentary evidence filed by
him. The applicant had no reason to believe that there was any defect in
the title of these IVPs or that the person who was given these documents
to him was himself not a bonafide holder; the applicant has to be
protected.
4 Accordingly, the prayer made in the present application is
allowed. The application is permitted to encash his IVPs from the post
office Meerut.
5 At this stage, learned counsel for the Official Liquidator points
out that if this amount is permitted to be withdrawn by the applicant,
this being an act of misfeasance on the part of the director of M/s
J.V.G.Finance Ltd. and M/s Hoffland Finance Ltd., he be permitted to
incorporate this amount in the misfeasance proceedings which he had
filed against M/s J.V.G.Finance Ltd. The Official Liquidator is
permitted to incorporate this amount if so permitted by law.
6 With these directions this application is disposed of.
INDERMEET KAUR, J
SEPTEMBER 12, 2012 nandan
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!