M/S Sikandrabad Chemicals Pvt Ltd vs Raj Financial Corp And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 2832 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

                  S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 515/2015
M/s Sikandrabad Chemicals Pvt Ltd
                                                                      ----Appellant
                                      Versus
Raj Financial Corp And Others
                                                                   ----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. R.K. Mathur, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Kritim Sharma For Respondent(s) : Ms. Sonal Singh through V.C. for Mr. Alok Garg

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order

04/04/2022

The appellant-plaintiff submits that appellant filed civil suit for rendition of account against the Rajasthan Financial Corporation (hereafter 'RFC'). He submits that RFC sanctioned loan of Rs.23.23 lakhs on the lease property of appellant Plot No. E 284, Matsya, Industrial Area, Alwar and out of such sanctioned loan, only Rs. 5.12 Lakhs were released. Loan agreement dated 26.08.1993 was executed between parties. Thereafter, appellant- Industry was closed way back on 30.12.1996 and the RFC has taken the possession of land and Machinery to realize the due loan amount, has auctioned the same against due amount.

Learned counsel for appellant submits that they filed civil suit for rendition of account asking the RFC that to give the details of principal dues and interest accrued thereupon. Trial court vide judgment and decree dated 29.07.2015 directed the respondent- RFC to furnish complete statement of loan account to the plaintiff, however the same has not been complied with.

This court, vide order dated 15.03.2022, directed the respondent-RFC to place on record the complete details of loan account of appellant with disclosure of principal loan amount and

(2 of 2) [CFA-515/2015]

interest calculated thereupon. However, respondent-RFC has not placed any details as yet. On the contrary, respondent-RFC has issued recovery notice against the appellant dated 13.01.2022 for loan amount of 32,53,000/-. The copy of recovery notice has been placed on record by the appellant alongwith application under Order 41 rule 27 CPC .

Since in the present appeal, there is a dispute between the parties about rendition of account and the RFC has not placed on record the complete details of loan account, on the contrary proceeding for recovery against the appellant, hence matter requires consideration.

Admit.

Since the dispute is between the appellant and respondent Nos.1 and 2. On the request of counsel for the appellant, service of notice upon respondent No.3 is dispensed with.

Since the possession of land and machinery of appellant has already been taken by the RFC way back on 30.12.1996 and thereafter, the appellant is out of possession and has been ready and willing to pay the due amounts subject to disclosure of the RFC about details of loan account.

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in case appellant deposits a lump-sum of Rs.10,00,000/- before the respondent-RFC within a period of four weeks, further recovery proceedings against the appellant shall remain stayed.

Accordingly, both the stay applications and application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC filed by the appellant stand disposed of.

However, it has been opened for the respondent-RFC to produce the details of loan account of the appellant.

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

TN/21

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)