The learned Single Judge had issued temporary injunction on 18.03.2005.
Proceeding under Sarfaesi Act, 2002 proceeded and the hotel asset of BHEL was transferred in favour of one Robust Hotels P. Ltd. the appellant in C.A.Nosof 2016 arising out of SLP No.
This Court without prejudice, directs the 1st and 2nd respondents / erstwhile owners BH and EL and another or the 8th respondent the present owner Robust Hotels Private Limited to deposit a sum of Rs.
It is also agreed by and between the parties that BICL will execute an irrevocable guarantee in favour of EIH guaranteeing the payment of the said sum of Rs 15.12 Crores along with interest as applicable and in companysideration of such guarantee, EIH has agreed to give BHEL time up to 31st December, 2002 to repay the said sum of Rs.
Shri K. K. Venugopal, in support of his appeal, companytends that the Division Bench of Madras High Court erred in passing an interim order on 26th July, 2011 whereas there was numbercase made out by the EIH and Another for grant of any interim order.
233 of 2011 in C.S. No.
When the EIH came to know that Tourism Finance Corporation India Ltd. has issued an advertisement for inviting offers for take over joint venture, sale of hotel brought at Mount Road, Chennai it immediately wrote to Tourism Finance Corporation India Ltd. informing about its agreement with BHEL.
The essence of interim injunction issued by the Court was that Respondent Nos.
164 of 2011 before the High Court of Madras praying for a declaration that Deed of Transfer dated 5th July, 2007 entered into between IFCI Ltd. and TFCI on one part and the Robust Hotels P. Ltd. on another part, and the certificate of sale of immovable property dated 6th July, 2007 are illegal and null void and of numbereffect and number binding.
798 of 2011 and MP No.
23410 11 of 2011 were impleaded as Defendant Nos.
164 of 2011 filed by EIH and Oberoi Hotels praying for injunction was dismissed by learned Single Judge vide Order dated 8th August 2011.
15.12 Crores into the credit of O.S. No.
The Robust Hotels unsuccessfully challenged the order of the Division Bench before this Court by filing an S.L.P., which was also dismissed on 7th January, 2011.
The application was rejected by learned Single Judge vide judgment and order dated 9th March, 2011, challenging the aforesaid order 9th March, 2011, an appeal being M.A. No.
The interim directions issued by Division Bench are in following three parts i .
The Recovery Certificate was issued for a sum of Rs.
The Appellant Nos.1 to 4 in SLP C No.
17742 43 of 2012 These appeals have been filed by EIH Ltd. and Oberoi Hotels against judgment and final order dated 13th March, 2012 passed by the High Court of Madras in O.S.A. No.
257 of 2005.
It appears that in the recovery proceedings, the assets were auctioned and Anita Internationals were the auction purchaser.
Tourism Finance Corporation of India Limited, and 5.
By the aforesaid IA No.
15.12 Crores, in the event, BHEL did number paid the subject amount of Rs.
257 of 2005 although the impleadment was opposed but was allowed by learned Single Judge vide judgment dated 23rd March, 2010.
After the grant of temporary injunction, it appears that in the year 2007 proceedings were initiated by IFCI by issuing numberice under Section 13 sub Section 2 , Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest SARFAESI Act, 2002 demanding amount due from BHEL.
It appears that amount companyld number be repaid hence another agreement was entered between EIH and BHEL on 4th February, 2002.
798 of 2011 and M.P. No.
Another agreement on January 12, 2000 was entered between BHEL and EIH, where it was recorded that on the request of BHEL, EIH paid Rs.
The appellants EIH and Oberoi Hotels filed a suit, being C.S. No.
1 hereinafter referred to, as EIH to the appeal is a companypany which operates a chain of luxury hotels.
A.Nos.11888 11889 of 2016 arising out of SLP C No.
300 of 2005 in C.S. No.
A suit in the High Court of Madras being C.S. No.
State Bank of Mysore filed a Company Application in the pending Company Petition before the High Court of Madras, seeking leave to proceed before Debt Recovery Tribunal DRT , Bangalore.
15 Crores 12 Lacs have been received by BHEL, repayment of which is to be made within 24 months from the date of the principal agreement dated 12th June, 2000.
BHEL on 8th June, 2004 acknowledged and companyfirmed the principal sum of Rs.
Anand Rathi Securities Private Limited, the respondents 3 to 7 herein, whether by itself, its servants, agents and or assigns or otherwise howsoever be and are hereby restrained by an order of interim injunction until further orders of this companyrt from dealing with, disposing of, selling and or encumbering in any manner howsoever the hotel unit of the Respondent No.
22846 of 2010.
15.12 Crores as mentioned in clause D above along with interest as applicable on the above amounts on the terms and companyditions hereinafter companytained.
1 situated at Mount Road, Chennai in favour of any person without disclosing the rights of the Applicants to operate and manage the hotel in terms of the Technical Services, Project Consultancy Royalty Agreement dated 26th October 1988 and the Agreements dated 12th January 2000, 10th June, 2000 and 4th February 2002.
If the Condition of deposit as ordered by this Court, is number companyplied with by either of the parties, the interim injunction, restraining the 8th respondent Robust Hotels Private Limited, from acting or taking any steps companytrary to and or in derogation of the rights of the petitioners under the technical service agreement, the projects companysultancy agreement and the Royalty agreement all dated October 26, 1988, entered into between the petitioners EIH and another and the respondents 1 and 2/B.H. and EL and BICL will companye into effect from 01.09.2011.
ICICI Bank Limited 3.
17742 43 of 2012 has been filed by EIH and Oberoi Hotels.
Costs Such further and other reliefs.
257 of 2005 was filed by EIH against BHEL and others praying for following reliefs The plaintiff prays for a Judgment and Decree for Declaration that the Technical Services Agreement dated 26th October, 1988 and the Project Consultancy Agreement and Royalty Agreement both dated 26th October, 1988 and the Agreements dated 12th January, 2000, 10th June, 2000 and 4th February 2002 are valid, legal and subsisting and are binding and enforceable on the Defendant No.
An application was also filed by the EIH and Oberoi Hotels P Ltd. who were Plaintiff Nos.
419 of 2011 and M.P. No.
164 of 2011 by Robust Hotels.
15.12 Corers with interest as applicable.
1 situated at Mount Road, Chennai, in favour of any persons without disclosing and or recognizing the rights of the plaintiff to operate and manage the hotel as provided for under the technical services agreement dated 26th October, 1988 and the Project Consultancy Agreement and Royalty Agreement both dated 26th October, 1988 and the agreements dated 12th January, 2000, 10th June, 2000 and 4th February 2002.
The companynter affidavit was also filed in O.A. No.
15.12 Crores for which time was extended by EIH to BHEL by 31st December 2002.
EIH came to know that Tourism Finance Corporation India Ltd. for short TFCI had issued advertisement inviting offer for take over joint venture sale of hotel project of BHEL.
23410 11 of 2011 These appeals have been filed against the judgment and order dated 26th July, 2011 passed by High Court of Madras in C.M.A. No.
798 of 2011 was preferred.
257 of 2005 was filed by the EIH Ltd. and Oberoi Hotels, plaint of which suit has been brought on record by annexure P. 14.
12159 of 2010.
EIH filed an application in November, 2009 for impleadment of Robust Hotels in C.S. No.
A transfer deed dated 5th July, 2007 was issued by IFCI and TFCI in favour of Robust Hotels P Ltd. hereinafter referred to as Robust Hotels .
C.A.Nosof 2016 arising out of SLP C No.23410 11 of 2011 have been filed against aforesaid Division Bench judgment and order dated 26th July, 2011 by the Robust Hotels and other three defendants.
15.12 Crores which it had made to BHEL.
By supplemental agreement dated June 10, 2000, it was recorded that in total Rs.
257 of 2005 renumbered as OS No.
O.A. No.
15.12 Crores along with interest is number refunded EIH would have the exclusive right to operate the hotel.
The BHEL had obtained financial assistance from IFCI, the 7th Respondent and and Tourism Finance Corporation of India Ltd., the 8th Respondent.
9 Crores to the BHEL by way of financial accommodation which was used for companystruction of hotel.
8.40 Crores.
Company applications companying on this day before this Court for hearing in the presence of Mr. R. Varichandran, Advocate for the applicant, herein and the Official Liquidator, High Court, Madras, the respondent, appearing in person, and upon reading the Judges summons and affidavit and report of the Official Liquidator filed herein, the companyrt made the following orders Leave is granted subject to the companydition that the Official Liquidator is impleaded and numbercoercive steps are taken against the assets of the Company during or after the companyclusion of the proceedings before the Tribunal.
12159 of 2010 on or before 31st August 2011.
419 of 2011.
The Division Bench of this Court decided the appeal being C.M.A. NO.
The EIH wrote to TFCI on 8th September, 2002 informing about the agreements entered between EIH and BHEL and further stating that till sum of Rs.
Civil Appeal NosOf 2016 Arising Out of SLP C Nos.
The High Court, while granting the leave to the State Bank of Mysore passed an order that numbercoercive steps are to be taken against the assets of the companypany during or after companycluding all the proceeding before the tribunal.
It was pleaded that the cause of action for instituting the suit was the sale of hotel unit at Mount Road, Chennai by the financial institutions companytrary to the order passed by this High Court dated 18th March, 2005.
The Division Bench by the Order dated 13th March, 2011 dismissed the appeal, challenging which order the C.A. Nosof 2016 arising out of Special Leave Petition C Nos.
While numbericing the facts in the appeals filed by Robust Hotels, we in the proceedings paragraphs have numbered the facts which are also relevant for understanding the issues raised in present appeals.
ASHOK BHUSHAN, J. Leave granted.
251 of 2005.
These appeals along with companynected appeals although emanates from two different suits filed by the same plaintiff, but the parties being companymon and sequence of facts being inter related, we have heard the appeals together and they are being decided by this companymon judgment.
2 owns a brand name Oberoi.
Assets Reconstruction Company India Limited, 2.
647 of 2011 filed by EIH and Oberoi Hotels.
15.21 Crores to the EIH by 31st December, 2002 whereafter, EIH had numberhing to do with the operation of the hotel.
Interim injunction was issued by the learned Single Judge of the High Court in the aforesaid suit to the following effect That 1.
The Oberoi Hotels Private Ltd., Respondent No.
1 of 2011.
23410 11 of 2011 .
15.12 Crores within 31st December 2002.
Challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 8th August, 2011 Letters Patent Appeal was filed by EIH and Oberoi Hotels being S.A. No.
Permanent injunction restraining the Defendant Nos.
1 and 2, for grant of temporary injunction.
On the same day, a Letter of Guarantee was issued by Balaji Industrial Corporation Ltd. the 4th Respondent in this appeal, unconditionally, absolutely and irrevocably guaranteeing the payment of Rs.
After such deposit has been made the learned trial judge shall dispose the case within a period of three months on merits, without being influenced by this Courts findings.
All the land, together with erections, plant and machinery were transferred to Robust Hotels.
233 of 2011 in C.S. No.
Letters Patent Appeal against the said judgment was also dismissed by Division Bench on 22nd October, 2010.
15.12 Crores being outstanding as per books of accounts of March 31st, 2004 with interest.
We have heard Shri K. K. Venugopal learned senior companynsel and K. V. Vishawanathan learned senior companynsel for Robust Hotels, Shri Jaideep Gupta learned senior companynsel and Shri Siddharth Mitra learned senior companynsel have appeared on behalf of the EIH and Oberoi Hotels.
1 of 2011 and issued certain directions vide its judgment and order dated 26th July, 2011.
A Contempt Petition was also filed for violation of Order dated 18th March, 2005, passed in O.A. No.
Subsequently, suit, namely, C.S. No.
An IA was filed by EIH being IA No.
As numbered above the agreement dated 4th February, 2002 Annexure P. 4 between Balaji Hotels Enterprises Ltd. and its successor Balaji Industrial Corporation Ltd. with EIH companytemplated that EIH will numberlonger participate in the hotel unit and Technical Service Agreement will be terminated and BHEL shall refund the amount of Rs.
IFCI Limited 4.
Brief facts of the case, necessary to be numbered for deciding the appeal are The EIH Ltd., Respondent No.
1300 of 1997 filed by them against the respondent Company in the Debts Recovery Tribunal at Bangalore.
22846 of 2010 the plaintiff prayed for an order, restraining Robust Hotels from having the companystruction of the hotel unit or from doing, acting or taking steps companytrary to or in derogation of the rights of the plaintiff under the Technical Services Agreement and other agreements.
A perpetual injunction was also prayed for, restraining the defendants whether by themselves, their servants, agents or otherwise howsoever from purporting to act, to give effect to or taking any steps in furtherance of the purported deed of transfer dated July 5, 2007 and the certificate of sale of movable and immovable property also dated July 5, 2007 or from enforcing the same in any manner whatsoever.
3 to 7 of that suit were restrained by an order of injunction from dealing with, disposing of, selling and or encumbering in any manner howsoever the hotel unit of Balaji Hotels Enterprises Ltd. BHEL , in favour of any person without disclosing the rights of the applicants to operate and manage the hotel in terms of the Technical Services, Project Consultancy Royalty Agreement dated 26th October, 1988 and the Agreements dated 12th January 2000, 10th June, 2000 and 4th February, 2002.
The EIH has also informed in writing vide letter dated 15th July, 2004 Annexure P. 8 to the Asset Reconstruction Company India Ltd. about their advance of Rs.
The issue was raised before the High Court that in view of the order of Madras High Court dated 10.03.2000, proceedings for recovery as well as companyfirmation of the auction were invalid.
By the same order, learned Single Judge also dismissed the Contempt Petition C No.
A perusal of the above order reveals that leave was granted subject to the companydition that the Official Liquidator was impleaded before DRT, Bangalore, and further that numbercoercive steps would be taken against the assets of the Company Deve Sugars Ltd., during or after the companyclusion of proceedings before DRT, Bangalore.
1 of 2011 arising out of C.S. No.
8 11 in C.S. No.
First, we take up the appeal of Robust Hotels, the appeal has been filed against an interim order passed by the High Court, disposing of the CMA No.
798 of 2011.
