DECCAN CHRONICLE HOLDINGS LTD Vs. PIL INDUSTRIES LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the Appeals arise from a judgment and order of a learned Single Judge dated 4 February 2013 on Chamber Summons which were taken out by the Appellant for revoking the leave which was granted by the learned Single Judge under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent. Both the learned Counsel have urged before the court the facts of the first of the two appeals and are agreed that since the issue is similar, the judgment will govern both the appeals.

(2.) THE Appellant in both the Appeals is the original First Defendant. The Appellant availed of financial facilities from Future Capital Holdings Limited, the Seventh Respondent (the Original Seventh Defendant). The Second, Third and Fourth Respondents furnished personal guarantees. Though the original loan facilities were provided to the First Defendant by the Seventh Defendant the Plaintiff claims under a Deed of Assignment dated 3 August 2012 by which the loan facilities and all the receivables, rights and benefits of the Seventh Defendant have been assigned to the Plaintiff. A loan facility agreement was entered into between the First and the Seventh Defendant on 11 July 2012. The claim in the suit is for the recovery of an amount of Rs.125 crores which is claimed to be due and payable to the Plaintiff or, alternatively, to the Seventh Defendant. The Plaintiff seeks in prayer (c) of the plaint a declaration of the existence of a valid and subsisting mortgage of immovable properties. The Plaintiff seeks, in the event that it is held that a valid mortgage by deposit of title deeds has not been created, a decree for specific performance of the agreement to create a mortgage by depositing title deeds. On this basis, the Plaintiff has sought the enforcement of the mortgage by the sale of properties and the application of the net sale proceeds in satisfaction of the claim of the Plaintiff. In the alternate, and in the event that specific performance is refused, the Plaintiff has sued for damages quantified at Rs.300 crores. Consequential reliefs have been claimed in the suit.

(3.) AN application was made before the learned Single Judge for revocation of the leave which was granted under clause 12 of the Letters Patent. The Chamber Summons for revocation has been dismissed by the impugned order dated 4 February 2013.