IN W.P. 4010 OF 2009 The Jalna Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Ramnagar v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. Thereafter on 22.2.1010, the Court modified its earlier order and directed that after payment of the Provident Fund dues, the balance amount would be appropriated for repayment of the debt of the respondent no.2-bank. Accordingly, the Court (3) WP 4010.2009 directed that after payment…
- Para 44. In our opinion, therefore, the Petition has become infructuous as the sugarbags have already been sold. In case the petitioners have any grievance regarding the steps taken by the bank under the Securitisation Act, the petitioner may avail of appropriate remedies under that Act.…
Judgment
Cause title
Mr. A.V. Patil, Advocate h/f.
Mr. V.D. Gunale, Advocate for the Petitioner/Applicants.
Mr. N.B. Patil, A.G.P. for the Respondent-State.
Mr. R.N. Dhorde, Advocate for the respondent no.2 Mr. K.B. Choudhari, Advcoate for the respondent no.3
Mr. Alok Sharma, Asst. Solicitor General for respondent no. 4- Union Of India.
Mr. V.D. Hon, Advocate for the respondent nos. 5 and 6
Mr. P.A. Kulkarni, Advocate for respondent nos. 7 yo 57
Mr. M.S. Kokate, Advocate for respondent no. 58 and 59 .....
CORAM : SMT. NISHITA MHATRE & M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 25TH JULY, 2011
ORAL ORDER:
The present Petition has been filed by the Sakhar Karkhana which has been issued a notice under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial (2) WP 4010.2009 Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short "the Securitisation Act"). The relief claimed in this Petition is that the respondents including the bank should be directed to sell the sugar bags produced in the factory of the petitioner and which were attached by the bank and to appropriate the dues after necessary directions.
By an order dated 22nd January, 2010 the Division Bench of this Court directed the sale of the sugar bags and further directed that the proceeds should first be paid over to the Provident Fund Commissioner in respect of the Provident Fund contributions i.e. employer's and employees' contributions which were payable by the Karkhana. While doing so, the Court restrained the respondent no.2 from disposing of the assets of the petitioner which were in the possession of the bank.
Thereafter on 22.2.1010, the Court modified its earlier order and directed that after payment of the Provident Fund dues, the balance amount would be appropriated for repayment of the debt of the respondent no.2-bank. Accordingly, the Court (3) WP 4010.2009 directed that after payment of the Provident Fund dues, the balance amount will be appropriated for repayment of the debt of the respondent no.2-bank.
In our opinion, therefore, the Petition has become infructuous as the sugarbags have already been sold. In case the petitioners have any grievance regarding the steps taken by the bank under the Securitisation Act, the petitioner may avail of appropriate remedies under that Act. The Petition is rejected. However, the stay granted by this Court restraining the bank from disposing of the assets of the Karkhana, shall continue for a period of two (2) weeks. Consequently, Civil Application nos. 13664 of 2009; 15829 of 2010; 15828 of 2010 and 15767 of 2010 are dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- [M.T. JOSHI, J.] [SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.] arp/
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.