Marg Ltd v. M/S.South India Corporation Agencies Ltd
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 22.02.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN Marg Ltd.
Rep.by its Managing Director, G.Ramakrishna Reddy, No.57/2B, Sri Sai Subhodaya Apartments, East Coast Road, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai - 600 041.
... Petitioner
Versus
1.M/s.South India Corporation (Agencies) Ltd., South India House 73, Armenian Street, Chennai - 600 001.
2.S.Vasudevan Managing Director, South India Corporation (Agencies) Ltd., South India House, 73, Armenian Street, Chennai - 600 001.
3.State Bank of India, Commercial Branch, NSC Bose Road, Chennai 1/12
4.State Bank of India, Bazullah Road Branch, T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017.
5.M/s.DSRK Holdings (Chennai) Pvt. Ltd., P.Kuppuswamy Complex, 34/8, Rajabathar Street, T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017 Presently at No.87, 4th Floor, GN Chetty Road, T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017.
6.M/s.Hacindaa Infotech and realtors P. Ltd.
Rep.by it Managing Director Mr.Narendrakumar Madanlal Sheth Rani Sethai Hall, 5th Floor No.603 Anna Salai Chennai - 600 006.
7.P.Rajakrishnan Rajagopal Managing Director M/s.DSRK Holdings Chennai Private Ltd. P.Karuppuswamy Complex 34/8 Rajabathar Street T.Nagar Chennai - 600 017. 8.Revathi Ramachandran Authorised Signatory M/s.DSRK Holdings (Chennai) Priate Ltd. P.Kuppuswamy Complex 348 Rajabathar Street T.Nagar Chennai - 600 017. 9.Embassy Property Developments Private Limited Having registered office at 1st Floor, Embassy Point No.150, Infantry Road Bangalore - 560 001.
Karnataka.
2/12
10.Mr.Jitendra Mohandas Virwani Managing Director Embassy Property Developments Private Limited 341 Embassy, Woods 6/A Cunnigham Road Vasanth Nagar Bangalore - 560 001 Karnataka.
11.Universal Trusteeship Services Ltd.
No.6 6th Street CIT Colony Mylapore Chennai - Tamil Nadu-600 004.
Also At:
B-1002,Marathon Futurex 10th Floor, N.M.Joshi Marg Lower Parel, Mumbai - 400 013.
12.ICICI Bank ICICI Bank Towers Bandra Kurla Complex Mumbai - 400 051 Also at:
No.1 Sobha Pear Commissariat Road Ashok Nagar Banglore - 560 025.
13.The Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (Proposed party) Thalamuthu Natarajan House 01, Gandhi Irwin Road Ansari Estate, Egmore Chennai Tamil Nadu - 600 008.
14.The Sub-Registrar Neelankarai Sub Registrar Office Neelankarai Chennai.
3/12
15.Narpat Singh Choraria Director Embassy Property Developments Private Limited No.332 Embassy Woods 6 A Cunningham Road, Vasanth Nagar Bangalore - 560 052.
16.Gopinath Ambadithody Director Embassy Property Developments Private Limited No.332 Embassy Woods 6 A Cunningham Road Vasanth Nagar Bangalore - 560 052. 17.Chandra Das Sitaram Director Embassy Property Developments Private Limited No.332 Embassy Woods 6 A Cunningham Road Vasanth Nagar Bangalore - 560 052. 18.Karan Virwani Director Embassy Property Developments Private Limited No.332 Embassy Woods 6 A Cunningham Road Vasanth Nagar Bangalore - 560 052. 19.Aditya Virwani Director Embassy Property Developments Private Limited No.332 Embassy Woods 6 A Cunningham Road Vasanth Nagar Bangalore - 560 052. 20.Tanya John, Director Embassy Property Developments Private Limited No.332 Embassy Woods 6 A Cunningham Road Vasanth Nagar Bangalore - 560 052. 21.Devika Priyadarshini Director Embassy Property Developments Private Limited No.332 Embassy Woods 6 A Cunningham Road Vasanth Nagar Bangalore - 560 052. 4/12
22.Radhakrishnan Yuvaraajann Director DSRK Holdings (Chennai) Private Ltd. No.87 4th Floor GN Chetty Road T.
Nagar Chennai - 600 017.
23.Yuvarajan Abhinesh Director DSRK Holdings (Chennai) Private Ltd. No.87 4th Floor GN Chetty Road T.
Nagar Chennai - 600 017.
24.Rajesh Ramchand Bajaj Director DSRK Holdings (Chennai) Private Ltd. No.87 4th Floor GN Chetty Road T.
Nagar Chennai - 600 017.
... Respondents Prayer: This Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the respondent Nos. 2,5,7 to 10 and 15 to 24 herein for the wilful and deliberate disobedience of the order dated 08.12.2010 in OA.No.1218 of 2010 in CS.No.811 of 2004. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ravi, Senior Counsel for Mr.NP.Vijayakumar For Respondents : Mr.Vijay Narayan Sr.Counsel for M/s.Varuni S.Mohan - R9 Mr.Abishek Jenasenan - R5.
M/s.Lavanaya Venkatesh - R1.
5/12
ORDER
This Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the respondent Nos. 2,5,7 to 10 and 15 to 24 herein for the wilful and deliberate disobedience of the order dated 08.12.2010 in OA.No.1218 of 2010 in CS.No.811 of 2004.
2. The present contempt petition is predicated on the premises that Para 10 of the aforesaid order has been violated by the 5th respondent inasmuch as, the 5th respondent has created mortgage of the property which is the subject matter of the above suit.
3. This Court had admitted this contempt petition and had ordered notice on the respondent and thus the respondents are before this Court. On earlier occasion an order came to be passed on 21.12.2023 wherein the 5th respondent who appears to be the contesting defendant in the suit undertook to file a report along with necessary documents. An affidavit has been filed the 5th respondent herein who is the 5th defendant in the suit. In the affidavit filed by the 5th respondent, the 5th respondent has stated that in respect of eight (8) mortgages referred to in the contempt 6/12
petition, the mortgages were all discharged.
4. Para 8 of the affidavit dated 06.02.2024 filed by the 5th respondent is extracted hereunder:
"With respect to the averments made in paragraph 17 and 18, it is humbly submitted as follows: a. Memorandum of Entry dated 09.03.2013 (Doc no. 1993 of 2013) The mortgage has been cancelled by way of cancellation of mortgage deed dated 09.03.2016 registered as doc. no. 1119 of 2016.
b. Memorandum of deposit of title deeds dated 02.09.2016 (Doc. no. 6655 of 2016) - Receipt evidencing discharge of mortgage dated 28.04.2021 registered as doc. no. 4320 of 2021.
c. Memorandum of deposit of title deeds dated 21.11.2019 (doc. no. 9760 of 2019) - Receipt evidencing discharge of mortgage dated 28.04.2021 registered as doc. no. 4321 of 2021.
d. Indenture of mortgage dated 27.04.2021 (Doc. no. 4322 of 2021) Receipt evidencing discharge of mortgage dated 27.10.2022 registered as doc. no. 12386 of 2022.
e. Indenture of mortgage without possession dated 28.04.2021 (doc. no. 4323 of 2021) - Deed of release dated 11.08.2022 registered as doc. no. 9298 of 2022. f. Memorandum of deposit of title deed dated 23.08.2021 (Doc. no. 7404 of 2021) - Receipt evidencing discharge of mortgage dated 27.10.2022 registered as 7/12
doc. no. 12384 of 2022.
g. Memorandum of deposit of title deeds dated 27.06.2022 (doc. no. 7616 of 2022) - Said document was rectified vide document dated 23.09.2022 registered as doc. no. 1107 of 2022 and the receipt evidencing discharge of mortgage dated 27.10.2022 is registered as doc. no. 12386 of 2022.
h. Indenture of mortgage without possession dated 11.08.2022 (doc. no. 9299 of 2022) - Receipt evidencing discharge of mortgage dated 05.12.2022 registered as doc. no. 14458 of 2022.
Therefore, it is humbly submitted that all the mortgages that the Petitioner has alleged have been executed in violation of the order dated 08.12.2010 have all been discharged by registered deeds as set out above. In addition, it is humbly submitted that at the time of execution of these mortgages, all the mortgagees conducted their due diligence and were clearly informed about the pendency of the present Suit before this Hon'ble Court. Therefore, it is humbly submitted that there is absolutely no violation of the order dated 08.12.2010 issued by this Hon'ble Court either in letter or spirit."
5. The learned Sr.Counsel for the contempt petitioner would submit that apart from the mortgages to the above eight mentioned persons, the 5th respondent has now created two other mortgages in favour of M/s.Piramal Trusteeship Services Pvt. Ltd., on 10.12.2022 vide 8/12
registered document No.14669 of 2022 and 25.09.2023, 27.09.2023 and 30.09.2023 registered as Document No. 12722 of 2023. Which was in violation of the Court's Order.
6. It is further submitted that not only the order passed by this Court on 08.02.2010 was violated by the 5th respondent but also the order passed by this Court on 21.12.2022. It is submitted that the 5th respondent ought to have disclosed the same in the said affidavit filed before this Court today.
7. That apart to be submitted that the purport of para 10 of the order dated 08.12.2010 was to protect not only the interest of 3rd parties but also indirectly the petitioner who is the plaintiff in the above suit. It is submitted that the mortgages have been created only with a view to protect the rights of the petitioner and inncoent third parties.
8. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsle for the contempt petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents and persued all the available materials on record. 9/12
9. In my view there is no contempt made out based on the directions contain in para 10 of the order passed on 08.12.2010. Although it would have been appropriate for the 5th respondent to give the particulars of the further mortgages created.
10. It is made clear that when the order was passed on 21.12.2023, the Court had not looked into the reocrds. It merely heard the counsel and recorded the submissions of the 5th respondent that the 5th respondent would be filing a report by giving the particulars of the mortgages created.
11. Be that as it may. I am of the view that there is no case made out of contempt of this Court's order dated 08.12.2010. Therefore, this Contempt Petition is liable to be dismissed. It is noticed that the suit is of the year 2004 and is still languishing in the Registry and further Judicial time has been wasted in this Contempt Petition. The nature of the suit is of commercial dispute and therefore, the case should be referred to the Commercial Division. In fact, the order passed by this Court on 10/12
08.12.2010 in para 17 also records that the suit should be disposed off within a period of six (6) months.
12. While dimsissing this contempt petition, I leave it open for the contempt petitioner to implead 3rd parties in whose favour mortgages have been created in the above suit so that the concern of the contempt petitioner as also the mortgager can be suitably addressed in the said case.
13. I direct the Registry to list CS.No.811 of 2004 before the Commercial Division on 11.03.2024.
14. With the above observations and directions, this Conempt Petition stands closed.
22.02.2024 Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking Order nst 11/12
C.SARAVANAN, J.
nst 22.02.2024 12/12