LAWS(BOM)-2025-8-35

PANCHAM INTERNATIONAL LTD. Vs. SHEVAM S/O. JUGALKISHORE

Decided On August 20, 2025
Pancham International Ltd. Appellant
V/S
Shevam S/O. Jugalkishore Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of parties, heard finally.

(2.) By present writ petition, the petitioners seek following reliefs by invoking Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) Petitioner No.1 is a Company duly incorporated under the Companies Act. The respondent No.1 is the original complainant filed a complaint through its Proprietor Ramchandra Ramgaopal Financial Services. The complaint was filed by the complainant on an allegation that the present petitioner No.1 Company had purchased pulses, edible oil and other goods from Navalkishore Kothari Sons which is a partnership firm having its office at Akola. The transaction between the present petitioner No.1 and Navalkishore Kothari Sons are prior to year 2002. An amount of Rs.35,26,102.00 was due and payable by the petitioner No.1 to Navalkishore Kothari Sons as on 31/3/2002. It was agreed between the petitioner No.1 and the Navalkishore Kothari Sons that the petitioner No.1 shall pay interest on the outstanding amount at the rate of 12% per annum. The petitioner No.1 had acknowledged the amount payable to Navalkishore Kothari Sons in writing from time to time. These acknowledgements are for the amount along with the interest. However, the petitioner No.1 failed to pay the amount to Navalkishore Kothari Sons. On 6/4/2021, Navalkishore Kothari Sons has transferred the debt due from the petitioner No.1 to the complainant. This transfer has been effected by way of registered instrument duly signed for and on behalf of Navalkishore Kothari Sons. As per this agreement, the complainant has agreed to pay an amount of Rs.70,00,000.00 to Navalkishore Kothari Sons on or before 31/12/2021. In consideration thereof, it is agreed that the complainant shall be entitled to receive, recover and retain the amount from petitioner No.1. It was specifically informed the complainant that in view of the acknowledgement given by the petitioner No.1, the debt is within limitation.