MAGMA FINCORP LIMITED Vs. MATHA METALS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondents are not represented despite apparent service. In one case intimation was served and the addressee did not respond thereto and later refused to accept the postal article and, in the other case, personal service was refused.

(2.) The appeal arises out of a punitive order passed on a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

(3.) It is evident that when the petition was received on January 25, 2017, the Court noticed that a sum in excess of Rs. 14.48 lakh was due in terms of the agreement, including an amount in excess of Rs. 7.68 lakh on account of defaulted instalments. A receiver was appointed to make an inventory of the "asset" covered by the agreement between the parties. The appellant herein and the receiver were directed to inform the respondents (the word "respondent" has been used in the last paragraph of the order) that the petition would appear after five weeks. The order also provided for the receiver to take possession of the "asset" if the respondents did not pay a sum of Rs. 7.70 lakh within three weeks of the date of communication of the order dated January 25, 2017.