BARODA EXTRUSION LIMITED Vs. SICOM LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Commercial Court, Vadodara dated 29.09.2016 passed below Exh.1 in Commercial Civil Suit No. 275 of 2016, by which, the learned Commercial Court has dismissed the said suit on the ground that the same is vexatious and frivolous, the original plaintiffs have preferred the First Appeal.

(2.) That the original defendant no.1 is public financial institution and the original defendant no.2 is assets reconstruction company. The proceedings were initiated by the defendant nos. 1 and 2 under the provisions of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as SARFAESI Act"), against the plaintiffs for huge sum of dues payable by the plaintiffs. The proceedings against original plaintiffs for recovery of remaining loan amount was also filed by the defendant no.1 company before the DRT, Ahmedabad. That the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act were challenged by the plaintiff no.2, before the Bombay High Court. The original plaintiff no.2 also filed Securitization Application No. 95 of 2015 against the defendant no.1 before the DRTII, Ahmedabad. One another Writ Petition was also filed by the plaintiff no.2 before the Bombay High Court against the SICOM Limited and others including Union of India, Governor, State of Maharashtra, Attorney General of India, Secretary, Department of Finance, SICOM Arc Limited, Gujarat Press Samachar, Sandesh Press, Divya Bhaskar, Loksatta, Gujarat Daily, Times of India, Free Press Journal etc. That number of other proceedings were initiated by the plaintiffs. That thereafter, the plaintiffs instituted present being Commercial Civil Suit No. 275 of 2016 before the Commercial Court, Vadodara against the respondents herein- original defendants, in which, plaintiffs have sought following reliefs.

(3.) Shri Godiwala, learned advocate for the original plaintiffs has vehemently submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commercial Court has material erred in dismissing the suit that too with exemplary cost of Rs. 50,000.00.