MALAY KUMAR CHATTERJEE Vs. CAPSTAN SHIPPING AND ESTATES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Court : The petitioner has filed this application to execute the order dated July 24, 2017 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in AP No.808 of 2012.

(2.) By the said order, the said application, AP No.808 of 2012, filed under Section 34 of the arbitration and Conciliation Act , 1996 was disposed of on the basis of the terms of settlement dated July 24, 2017 entered into between the parties. A copy of the said terms of settlement has been disclosed in the application. In terms of clause 12 of the said terms of settlement, the respondent in this application is liable to pay the rates and taxes in respect of the said premises being premises No.58/45, Prince Anwar Shah Road, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as "the said premises")but admittedly the respondent has failed to discharge such obligation. The said terms of settlement further provides that the parties therein shall make all necessary endeavour to find out a buyer in respect of the first floor, mezzanine floor and ground floor and the garage space of the said premises comprising an area of 2435 sq. ft. (approximately) (hereinafter referred to as the "unsold portion of the said premises"). As per clause 5 of the said terms of settlement if the parties herein failed to bring any intending/prospective purchaser of the said unsold portion of the said premises, within a period of nine months from the date of publication of the advertisement as provided under clause 3 thereof, then either party will have the option to purchase the said unsold portion of the said premises after paying the price of his share of the unsold portion at the reserve price of Rs.4,000/- per square foot.

(3.) In this application it is a case of the petitioner that the parties have not been able to find out any buyer of the unsold portion of the said premises at the reserve price of Rs.4,000/- per square foot. It is the further case of the petitioner that the respondent company is in occupation of the unsold portion of the said premises and they are carrying on their business therefrom. The respondent company have not discharged his obligation under the said terms of settlement towards paying the outstanding corporation rates and taxes of the said premises. The petitioner has already informed the respondent of his inability to exercise the right of option to purchase the unsold portion of the said premises. Even the respondent is not willing to exercise his right of option to purchase the unsold portion of the said premises at the price mentioned in the said terms of settlement. In these facts, the petitioner submitted that when the respondent has no intention to discharge their obligation under the said terms of settlement in making payment of the outstanding corporation rates and taxes in respect of the premises and they are not in a position to purchase the said unsold portion of the said premises, this Court would an appoint a Receiver to take possession of the said unsold portition of the said premises and thereafter, the Receiver may be directed to take steps for sale of the unsold portion of the said premises.