DINESH MITTAL Vs. TRIVENI INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application filed by M/s. Sanchar Nest Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd., which is a registered society bearing registration No.4302 of 22.07.2009 for carrying out the objective of identifying and constructing flats for its members, who are serving and retired employees of the Government of India and the public sector undertaking including BSNL. The following are the prayers in the application: -

(2.) BEFORE I take up the rival contentions, it is necessary to give a brief introduction to the events which led to the filing of the application. On 01.12.2009 a memorandum of understanding was entered into between the applicant on the one hand and three companies, of which the company now in liquidation (M/s. Triveni Infrastructure Development Company Ltd.) is one, on the other. This MoU was for the purchase by the applicant of certain lands in Ghaziabad. The total extent of the land was 64,518.96 sq. yds. This MoU was, however, cancelled on 25.03.2010. On 26.04.2010, another MoU was entered into between the applicant, 3 companies and another company by name M/s. Rewari Developers Pvt. Ltd. in respect of 32,835.97 sq. yds. of land. In its order passed on 25.05.2010 it was directed by this Court that the applicant should pay the directors for the land who in turn will deposit the monies in the Court. In W.P. (Crl.) 390/2010 this Court noted that out of the sum of Rs.4,39,34,306/ - payable towards 9000 sq. yds. of land, an amount of Rs.1,25,00,000/ - was deposited with the Registrar General and the balance of Rs.3,14,34,306/ - was released directly to the investors who were part of the 380 investors verified by the Economic Offences Wing. This amounted to about 27.40% of the total price for the land.

(3.) C .A. No.2375/2011 was then filed by the applicant before the learned Company Judge seeking return of the amount of Rs.8.32 crores with interest at 24% per annum on the ground that the company (M/s. Triveni Infrastructure Development Ltd.) did not have the title to the land to be sold to the applicant. The Court, however, held that the applicant should forthwith deposit the balance sale consideration with the Court since that was the last day for payment of the balance; it even offered to the applicant that the balance will be kept in a fixed deposit receipt (FDR) in the name of the Registrar General of the Delhi High Court initially for a period of 2 months during which period the application would be decided. It was also put to the applicant that the amount kept in the FDR would be appropriated only after actual, physical and vacant possession of the land is given to the applicant in the presence of a Local Commissioner appointed by the Court. These suggestions were, however, not acceptable to the applicant whose representative ''refused to accept the said offer on the ground that the applicant has taken a commercial decision not to go ahead with the purchase of the property ''. In the light of this stand taken by the applicant, the learned Company Judge cancelled the applicant 's bid and the sale and ordered fresh auction notice to be issued by the company.