Magma Fincorp Ltd. Vs. Virendra and anr. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
the court : the earlier section 9 application, ap no.284 of 2010, was disposed of by me on 9th september, 2010, confirming the order of injunction. it was noticed there that neither the respondents nor the equipment could be located by the receiver. therefore, the receiver was directed to continue as an officer under the arbitrator. in case the equipment could be found, he could take its possession and seek ratification of such action from this court within a period of two weeks from such date. this is another section 9 application. the petitioner has been able to identify some properties of the respondents mentioned in paragraph 62 of the petition. learned counsel for the petitioner seeks an order for immediate attachment of those properties together with further orders for complete disclosure of their assets by the respondents and for their attachment to secure the claim of the petitioner. this application is moved ex parte on the apprehension that if notice is given, the respondent will alienate or part with possession of their properties. therefore at this moment, i pass an order of injunction in terms of prayer (j) of the petition. i also appoint mr. udayan chakraborty, advocate, bar library club, as receiver at an initial consolidated remuneration of 700 gms to be paid by the petitioner for both ap no.562 of 2010 and ap no.561 of 2010 to make an inventory of the above property mentioned in paragraph 62 of the petition and file a report before this court. further orders for interrogation of the respondents to disclose their other assets will be considered on the returnable date. i make this application returnable on 4th october, 2010, when the receiver is to file his report. receiver and all parties concerned are to act on a signed photocopy of this order upon the usual undertakings.

Judgment:
The Court : The earlier Section 9 application, AP No.284 of 2010, was disposed of by me on 9th September, 2010, confirming the order of injunction. It was noticed there that neither the respondents nor the equipment could be located by the Receiver. Therefore, the Receiver was directed to continue as an Officer under the Arbitrator.

In case the equipment could be found, he could take its possession and seek ratification of such action from this Court within a period of two weeks from such date. This is another Section 9 application. The petitioner has been able to identify some properties of the respondents mentioned in paragraph 62 of the petition.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks an order for immediate attachment of those properties together with further orders for complete disclosure of their assets by the respondents and for their attachment to secure the claim of the petitioner. This application is moved ex parte on the apprehension that if notice is given, the respondent will alienate or part with possession of their properties.

Therefore at this moment, I pass an order of injunction in terms of prayer (j) of the petition. I also appoint Mr. Udayan Chakraborty, Advocate, Bar Library Club, as Receiver at an initial consolidated remuneration of 700 GMs to be paid by the petitioner for both AP No.562 of 2010 and AP No.561 of 2010 to make an inventory of the above property mentioned in paragraph 62 of the petition and file a report before this Court.

Further orders for interrogation of the respondents to disclose their other assets will be considered on the returnable date. I make this application returnable on 4th October, 2010, when the Receiver is to file his report.

Receiver and all parties concerned are to act on a signed photocopy of this order upon the usual undertakings.