Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + SC Companies Law - 2006 (8) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2006 (8) TMI 527 - SC - Companies LawWhether the possession of the property had been handed over or not? Held that:- The property in suit for all intent and purport was acquired for the benefit of the Company. Only because at the time of acquisition of the property by Sarafs, the Company was unincorporated, the same would not mean that no title could have been passed in favour of the Company. In view of their conduct, Sarafs were estopped and precluded from denying and disputing the title of the Company over the property in dispute. Withdrawal of suit No. 1252 of 1982 by the appellants did not create any embargo in raising a contention that the award of the arbitrator and the consequent decree passed were void ab initio and of no effect.The agreement for sale dated 11.6.1984 was not a transaction for loan. Saraf's conduct was condemnable so far as they not only raised false and frivolous pleas but also initiated frivolous proceedings in courts of law. The subject matter of the agreement was not only the house in question but also the entire lands. Prima facie the demolition of the house took place at the instance of the appellants. However, it is not a case where the appellants are entitled to a decree for specific performance of contract. The respondents should refund the amount of advance of Rs.10,00,000/- (ten lakhs) with interest and furthermore pay compensation to the extent of Rs.50,00,000/- (fifty lakhs). Appeal allowed.
|