BANK OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. EXTRUSION PVT. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the Advocates. This is usual bank suit. The claim involved in this suit is Rs.1.65 crores. By the ad-interim order dated 23rd April, 1993, Court Receiver is appointed as per prayer (b) except the bracketed portion. Admittedly the factory is not running at all. There was subsequent order dated 25th April, 1995 empowering the Court Receiver to sell the machinery.

(2.) NOW the Counsel for the Plaintiff is pressing that land and the immovable property viz. the factory should also be sold by the Court Receiver because, according to the Plaintiff's Advocate, the Defendants have removed and sold machinery from the factory inspite of the injunction order and the price of the machinery was about Rs.55.00 lakhs. The Plaintiff has also taken out Contempt Motion against the Defendants for this breach of injunction order by removal of machinery by the Defendants.

(3.) IF at all the conduct of the Defendants is to be considered for accepting the prayer of the Plaintiff for sale of immovable property, then there has to be a finding of the Court that property was sold by the Defendants inspite of the injunction order. Since the Contempt Motion is pending, I do not propose to enter into that controversy, the necessary finding may be given by the Court dealing with the Contempt Motion. Therefore prayer of the Plaintiff to sell the immovable property cannot be accepted, at this stage. However, the plant and machinery are required to be sold because the Defendants have not availed of the opportunity and chance given by the Court to them to run the factory. Three years have elapsed since this opportunity was given. Admittedly value and utility of the property i.e. the Plant and machinery will go down every day that is by passage of time and therefore no further opportunity to the Defendants can be given to run the factory as Agent of the Receiver. I, therefore, pass the following order:-