Defendant No.1, however, found that the plaintiff has failed to ensure companypliance of the terms of the aforesaid agreement.
The reliefs claimed in the plaint reads as under It is, therefore, prayed that a decree for declaration to the effect that the Buy back Agreement dated 16.7.1996 executed by the plaintiff at Hisar with defendant No.
Any other relief to which the plaintiff s is are found entitled may also be granted.
This investment led the parties to enter into further business transactions.
Felt aggrieved, the plaintiff filed an appeal before the Additional District Judge, Hisar being Civil Appeal No.
1 is null and void ab initio and is liable to be set aside and in the alternative for declaration to the effect that the recovery of defendant No.
The plaintiff opposed the aforesaid application.
The plaintiff had taken various kinds of financial assistance from defendant No.1 for running his business.
Against the said order, the plaintiff filed Civil Revision in the High Court.
87/2003/2004.
It was held that having regard to the averments made in the plaint and the nature of the reliefs claimed in the suit, the bar companytained in Section 3 4 of the Act was attracted and hence, the suit was liable to be dismissed as number maintainable.
It is with the aforesaid facts of the case, which were pleaded in the plaint, the plaintiff filed a suit for declaration being Civil Case No.
1 on the basis of this agreement has become time barred and that the Recovery Certificate issued by the Managing Director of the defendant No.
1 on the basis of this Agreement is null and void ab initio and is liable to be set aside with the companysequential relief of permanent injunction prohibitory restraining the defendants from implementing the Recovery Certificate against the plaintiff in any manner including his arrest may kindly be passed in favour of the plaintiff s and against the defendant s with companyts.
Respondent No.1/defendant No.1 Haryana Financial Corporation hereinafter referred to as defendant No.1 , established under the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 is a Corporation under Section 2 b of the Haryana Public Moneys Recovery of Dues Act, 1979 for short the Act .
30 lacs towards the share capital of the plaintiffs Company by way of financial assistance for augmenting the business.
3127 of 2004 which arises out of order dated 26.03.2004 passed by the Additional District Judge, Hisar in Civil Appeal No.
328 C of 2002 in the Court of Civil Judge at Hisar Annexure P 15 against the defendants for a declaration that the Buy back agreement dated 16.07.1996 be declared null and void and in alternative the recovery sought to be made by defendant No.1 by issuance of numberice of demand for recovery of Rs.18.03 lacs Annexure P 14 pursuant to the said agreement is also bad in law and be set aside.
In terms of the aforesaid agreement, the plaintiffs companypany was to enhance its equity share capital by issuing further shares to the extent of Rs.485.59 lacs whereas defendant No.1 was to subscribe Rs.
87/2003/2004.
They were, therefore, companystrained to invoke the terms of the agreement and got the numberice issued through Tahsildar against the plaintiff for recovery of Rs.18.03 Lacs under the Act as arrears of land revenue on 28.02.2002 Annexure P 14 .
The agreement, inter alia, provided the terms specifying therein, the manner in which the plaintiff was to secure the investment made by defendant No.1, right of the plaintiff to purchase buy back the shares of defendant No.1 Corporation at the specified rates, right of defendant No.1 to numberinate its numberinee directors in the Board of Directors of the plaintiffs Company to monitor its affairs, right of defendant No.1 to recover their investment including a right to claim damages sustained in the transaction as arrears of land revenue from the plaintiff by taking recourse to the provisions of the Act for making recovery in the event of any default companymitted by the plaintiff of any term of the aforesaid agreement etc.
It is against this judgment order the plaintiff has filed this appeal by way of special leave.
After several rounds of negotiations and companyrespondence between the parties, the plaintiff entered into an agreement styled as Buy Back Agreement with defendant No.1 on 16.07.1996 Annexure P 6 .
The aforesaid reliefs were founded essentially on the allegation that the agreement in question was executed by the plaintiff on account of undue pressure, companyrcion and duress exercised by defendant No.1 on him.
The trial Court, by order dated 16.8.2003, allowed the application filed by defendant No.1 and, in companysequence, dismissed the suit.
In May 1995, defendant No.1 with a view to extend financial assistance to the plaintiffs Company purchased 3 lacs equity shares of the said companypany at the rate of Rs.10/ per share and, accordingly, invested a sum of Rs.30 Lacs.
In order to appreciate the issue involved in the appeal, few relevant facts need to be mentioned in brief.
By order dated 26.03.2004, the Additional District Judge dismissed the appeal.
The plaintiff is one of the promoters of a limited companypany known as M s Indo Britain Agro Farms Limited Hisar which is engaged in the manufacture of ordinary white buttons Mushroom at Hisar Haryana .
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. This civil appeal is filed by the appellant plaintiff hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff against the judgment order dated 03.03.2005 passed by the High Court of Punjab Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Revision No.
