MUKESH BHAVARLAL BHANDARI Vs. UCO BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, in both these petitions being guarantors of respondent No.2 company and defaulters to the tune of more than Rs.75 crores, have filed these petitions and as common question of law about exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India visavis availability of alternative remedy under the statute arise for consideration, with consent of learned counsel for the parties, both the petitions are taken up for hearing.

(2.) In Special Civil Application No.13529 of 2015, the petitioners / original defendant Nos.2 and 3 are the directors of respondent No.2 - original defendant No.1 - M/s. Electrotherm [India] Ltd. and guarantors in the loan transaction entered into by the respondent No.2 company with respondent No.1 Uco Bank on 04.09.2010 for shortterm loan of Rs.50 Crores.

(3.) That Special Civil Application No.14480 of 2015 is preferred by the petitioners with a prayer to quash and set aside order dated 06.07.2015 passed by the DRTI, Ahmedabad in Original Application No.192 of 2011, which was filed by Syndicate Bank, respondent No.1. The facts of Special Civil Application No.14480 of 2015 being similar to that of earlier Special Civil Application No.13529 of 2015, except the amount of total claim of Rs.25,51,45,359.34, in this case also, cheque of Rs.25 crores given by the defendant No.1 i.e. M/s. Electrotherm (India) Limited came to be returned unpaid for which defendant Nos.2 and 3 i.e. petitioners herein stood as guarantors for short term loans. In this Original Application No.192 of 2011, where judgment is delivered by the DRT on 06.07.2015 in which contentions raised by learned advocate on facts and law and findings, reasonings and conclusions of DRT are almost same to that of order dated 13.05.2015 passed in Original Application No.125 of 2011 and, therefore, to avoid repetition, same are not reproduced in this order.