TIRUPATI TEXKNIT LIMITED Vs. ALLAHABAD BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a suit filed by the plaintiff for recovery, rendition of accounts, and delivery by the defendant of: list of unpaid instruments; computers; floppies; paid instruments in original; and copies of returns of different branches of the defendant. The relief of delivery is essentially sought against the defendant with respect to details of paid and unpaid refund orders issued qua unsuccessful applicants of the public issue of shares of the plaintiff.

(2.) In this context, it would be necessary to note the plaintiff's allegations against the defendant. On 11.01.1990 the plaintiff issued a prospectus for a public issue of equity shares. It is alleged that on 12.03.1990, the Board of Directors of the plaintiff passed a resolution appointing the BCCI as its bankers for handling refund orders in respect of over-subscribed public issue. Consequently, on 13.03.1990 the plaintiff sent a formal letter to the BCCI confirming their appointment as the Refund Banker, in respect of its public issue which, closed on 15.02.1990. The necessary application form, copy of the resolution, and a copy of the Memorandum and Articles of Association were enclosed therewith. It is the plaintiff's case that the defendant in turn accepted the engagement, under BCCI, to effectuate the functions of the Refund Banker, which were essentially entrusted to BCCI, in respect of areas, other than Bombay (now Mumbai). The basic premise of the defendant's engagement was that the 100% funding would be provided by the plaintiff; coupled with an obligation to reconcile statements of both paid and unpaid refund orders. Accordingly, the plaintiff provided funds to BCCI in the sum of Rs 11,89,54,800/-, out of which, BCCI transferred a sum of Rs 10.33 crores to the defendant, on 24.04.1990. It is, however, averred by the plaintiff that it had remitted, apart from the above, additional funds to the defendants, the details of which are as follows: Amount (Rs) Date of Remission 5,00,000/- 12.09.1990 3,00,000/- 01.07.1991 1,60,000/- 07.03.1992 12,800/- 21.06.1993

(3.) The defendant, on the other hand, has denied the case set up by the plaintiff as is indicated in the aforementioned paragraph i.e., 2.9. As a matter of fact the defendant has averred in the written statement that the amount paid to the BCCI for making payment against refund orders was a sum of Rs 11,87,90,600/- and not Rs 11,89,54,800/- as averred in the plaint. Though it is admitted that the defendant had received funds from BCCI to the tune of Rs 10.33 crores, on 24.04.1990 for the purpose of processing refund orders of unsuccessful applicant of the share issue. 3.1 What is specifically denied is the fact that the plaintiff paid an additional amount of Rs 5 lacs on 12.09.2009. The defendant has taken the stand that since it did not have a branch, in every area, it was mandated to appoint other banks as a Refund Banker. In one such area, Punjab & Sindh Bank was appointed, and it was money received from Punjab & Sindh Bank, G-Block, Connaught Circus Branch, New Delhi, which was received in the account of the defendant and not from the plaintiff. It is also averred that the said sum of Rs 5 lakhs was part and parcel of the total funding equivalent to Rs 10.33 crores.