Aks Properties Ltd And Ors vs M.B.R. Aastha Bhagwati ...
2013 Latest Caselaw 1160 Del

*             IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+             CS(OS) 2086/2011           and   I.A.Nos.    13593/2011           &
              11755/2012

                                            Date of Decision: 7th March, 2013

IN THE MATTER OF
AKS PROPERTIES LTD AND ORS                             .. Plaintiffs
                    Through : Mr. Shashi Bhushan Jain, Advocate

                         versus

M.B.R. AASTHA BHAGWATI EDUCATIONAL TRUST AND ORS.. Defendants
                   Through : Mr. C.S. Gupta, Advocate


CORAM
HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

HIMA KOHLI, J. (Oral)

1. The plaintiffs have filed the present suit against the defendant

No.1/Trust, its Chairman and Treasurer, defendants No.2 & 3

respectively, praying inter alia for a decree of `73,50,000/- alongwith

interest @ 12% p.a., costs and expenses. Besides the above relief, the

plaintiffs have also prayed for a decree of permanent injunction against

the defendant No.1/Trust, restraining it from parting with the parcel of

land measuring 0.89 hectare situated in village Thada, Tehsil Tizara,

Rajasthan, original title deeds whereof were handed over by the

defendant No.1/Trust to the plaintiff No.1/company as security for the

loan advanced.

2. Counsel for the plaintiffs states that the plaintiff No.1/Company is in

the business of financing, with or without security. It is stated that the

plaintiff No.1/Company sought to enter into a partnership with the

defendant No.1/Trust to run a hundred-bed hospital along with a dental

college, which was awaiting approval from the DCI, for 100 BDS seats. As

per the understanding between the plaintiff No.1/Company and the

defendant No.1/Trust, against surety of a parcel of land measuring 0.89

hectares situated at village Thada, Tehsil, Tizara, Rajasthan offered by the

defendants, the plaintiff No.1/Company had extended a loan to the tune

of `73,50,000/- to the defendant No.1/Trust by making staggered

payments. The first cheque received by the defendant No.1/Trust on

21.4.2009 was for the sum of `10.00 lacs, the second cheque for the sum

of `16,50,000/- was received on 30.4.2009, the third cheque for the sum

of `17,00,000/- was received on 29.3.2010, the fourth cheque for the

sum of `43,50,000/- was received on 1.4.2010 and the last cheque for

the sum of `30.00 lacs was received by the defendant No.1/Trust on

4.6.2010.

3. To secure the loan advanced by the plaintiffs to the defendant

No.1/Trust, the latter had handed over the original title deeds of the

subject parcel of land to the plaintiff No.1/Company. Subsequently, the

aforesaid project did not take off and the plaintiffs kept approaching the

defendant No.1/Trust for return of the said amounts given as loan to the

latter and upon failure to receive any response from their end, the

present suit was instituted by the plaintiff No.1/Company in August 2011.

4. Summons were issued in the suit and appearance was entered on

behalf of the defendants. In the written statement filed by the

defendants, the averments made in the plaint have been duly admitted.

The defendants have stated therein that they do not have any objection if

the land in question, the original title deeds whereof are in the custody of

the plaintiffs as security for the loan availed, is disposed of and the sale

proceeds are adjusted towards the outstanding amount which is payable

to the plaintiffs.

5. Counsel for the plaintiffs states that in view of the admissions made

by the defendants in their written statement, a judgment on admission

may be passed in terms of Order XII Rule 6 CPC, by decreeing the suit in

favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants, as prayed for in prayer

clause (a) of the plaint.

6. As the other side has no objection to the aforesaid request, the suit

is decreed in favour of the plaintiffs by holding that they are entitled to

recover a sum of `73,50,000/- from the defendant No.1 along with

interest payable @ 10% p.a. from the date the staggered amounts were

paid to the defendants, till realization. Further, as agreed, the plaintiffs

shall be entitled to recover the aforesaid amount by selling the parcel of

land owned by the defendant No.1/Trust, measuring 0.89 hectare situated

in village Thada, Tehsil Tizara, Rajasthan, and adjusting the sale proceeds

against the decretal amount. It is however clarified that when the

plaintiff No.1/Company identifies a suitable buyer, it shall give a written

intimation of the offer received from the buyer for purchase of the said

land to the defendant No.1/Trust and if the defendants are able to find a

better buyer, then they shall approach the plaintiffs with the relevant

details within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of such a

written intimation. If the defendants do not revert back to the plaintiffs

within the aforesaid timeline, then the plaintiffs shall be at liberty to

proceed further by taking necessary steps for sale of the subject land to

the buyer as identified by them. It has been agreed by the defendants

that they shall render all necessary cooperation to the plaintiffs for

completion of the sale transaction and execution of the sale deed in

respect of the parcel of land.

7. It is further directed that if after adjusting the sale proceeds of the

subject parcel of land against the decretal amount, the judgment and

decree remains unsatisfied, the plaintiffs shall be at liberty to recover the

balance outstanding amount from the defendant No.1, in accordance with

law.

8. The suit is decreed on the aforesaid terms, along with costs.

9. The suit is disposed of along with the pending applications.

                                                               (HIMA KOHLI)
MARCH 07, 2013                                                    JUDGE
sk/mk/rkb