PRIYA PLASTICS Vs. RAJASTHAN FINANCIAL CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two writ petitions being related to the same matter of sale of assets of M/s. Priya Plastics (the petitioner of Writ Petition No. 2359/1989) by the Rajasthan Financial Corporation (RFC), and having interconnected facts, have been heard together and are taken up for disposal by this common order. The matter encompasses background facts and so also 0subsequent developments and could be taken into comprehension as follows : Facts as stated in Writ Petition No. 2359 /1989

(2.) The petitioner of the writ petition No. 2359/1989 is the borrower of loan from RFC and defaulter in repayment. The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in the writ petition are the RFC and its Deputy General Manager respectively, the respondent No.3, Shri Rani Dan Soni has been one of the bidders for purchase of the assets of the petitioner M/s. Priya Plastics, and his bid of Rupees 1,76,000.00 forms one limb of contentions in these cases; the respondent No. 4 Shri R. D. Sharma is the subsequent bidder whose negotiated bid of Rs. 1,66,000.00 for purchase of the assets in question has admittedly been approved by the RFC; and the respondent No.5 Shri Govind Puri has made a subsequent offer of Rs. 2,01,000.00 for purchase of the same assets. The said respondent No.5 Shri Govind Puri is the petitioner of the connected Writ Petition No. 1841/1989,

(3.) According to the petitioner M/s. Priya Plastics, it had availed of a loan of Rs. 1,27,000.00 for the purpose of its small scale industrial undertaking from the respondent RFC in the month of March, 1981 and an agreement was executed on 19-3-1981 (Annex. 1). According to the petitioner, the industrial unit was ready for production in the month of September, 1981 but on account of the factors like power-cut and rise in taxes, the factory established by the petitioner ran in losses and had to stop production after six months; the petitioner sought additional loan and availed the same to the tune of Rs. 31,000.00 in the month of October, 1981 and the unit re-started production but again on account of the same factors, closed down after a period of about 6-9 months. The petitioner has averred that it could not repay the loan instalments and the respondent RFC pressed hard for repayment and refused any relief and after serving of notice, put their lock on the petitioner's factory on 30-10-1985. A notice for auction was published in the newspaper dated 30-1-1986. The petitioner filed writ petition No. 326/1986 before this Court challenging taking over of possession and for other reliefs regarding grant of concessional treatments and waver of penalty and for re-schedulement of payment etc. The said writ petition was dismissed on 27/2/1987. The petitioner has averred that its factory is in possession of the respondent RFC since 30/10/1985 and the petitioner was not aware about the proceedings taken by them after 27/1/1987.