ANZ GRINDLAYS BANK Vs. NHPC LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This suit is filed by ANZ Grindlays Bank against three defendants. It is the case of the plaintiff that on or about 2nd of April, 1992 plaintiff purchased from defendants 2 & 3 9% NHPC 1987 (B-Series) Bonds worth Rs. 2,58,95,000 .00 for a consideration of Rs. 2,20,10,750.00 . The said bonds are issued by defendant No. 1.

(2.) It is the claim of the plaintiff that when they had purchased the said bonds they had also purchased alongwith the said bonds the interest warrants to be issued by defendant No. I against the said bonds in favour of defendants 2 & 3. It is their claim that they were to get the interest warrants not only as on the date of transaction between the parties but also the interest warrants for the future. It is the further claim of the plaintiff that defendants 2 & 3 are not handing over the said interest warrants to them and they were not abiding by the terms of the contract between the parties. Therefore, plaintiff has filed the present suit to get a decree for recovery of interest warrants by way of issuing a mandatory injunction against defendants 2 & 3 to deliver them the interest warrants issued and issuable by defendant No. I. In the alternative the plaintiff-Bank has made a claim in cash of the amount which accrued against the interest warrants which, according to them, they are entitled to get for non-delivery of the said interest warrants. They have further made a claim against defendant No. I by way of a decree of perpetual injunction to restrain defendant No. I from negotiating the interest warrants purchased by defendants 2 & 3 and to restrain them to get encashment of interest warrants issued by defendant No.l in their favour.

(3.) It is not necessary to mention in detail the contentions raised on behalf of the defendants in the suit. It is suffice to mention that defendants 2 & 3 do not accept any of the claims made by the plaintiff against them. Their main contention is that there was no agreement between the parties and they had never agreed to give the interest warrants to the plaintiff and they had only sold the 9% NHPC (B-Series) 1987 Bonds. I am not going in detail regarding the other contentions raised by the defendants in this suit because I am only considering the question as to whether the present suit falls within the purview of The Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act of 1993) and whether the present suit will have to be transferred to the Tribunal established under the said Act of 1993.