TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 708X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t has clearly found that the securities need to be released in favour of the applicant/Respondent No.5. The only question is with regard to the mode and manner of the securities to be furnished by the applicant/Respondent No.5. It is not disputed that the petitioner has, in terms of the order dated 16.03.2021, complied with the condition of furnishing bank guarantee of ₹ 344.07 Crores. In paragraph 20 of this application filed by the applicant/Respondent No.5, it is stated that the applicant is a public limited company, having sound financials with a strong balancesheet and other financial statements (assets of INR 18,556 Crores and turnover of INR 8,779 Crores during financial year 202021). The same is not denied by the other part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a nationalized bank. The said order was modified by this Court by a detailed order dated 16.03.2021 passed in I.A. No.100812/2020 in C.A. Nos.53955398 of 2019, the operative portion of which is extracted below: 10. Therefore, we modify the Interim Order dated 27.08.2019 to the extent that the Mutual Fund units of Respondent No.5Applicant, kept with the Respondent No.1ISSL, be released in favour of the Respondent No.5Applicant by way of transfer of the said Mutual Fund units and crediting the same in the demat account of the Respondent No.5Applicant. This is subject to the Applicant furnishing requisite Bank Guarantee of equivalent value as the Mutual Fund units, to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. The Respondent No.5Applicant shal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fidavit before this Court to the extent that the asset, which is being furnished as security, is an unencumbered property. 5. The present application, I.A. No.6482 of 2022, has been filed by the applicant/Respondent No.5 for a further modification of the order dated 21.09.2021, the prayers of which read as under: a. Allow the present Application seeking modification of order dated 21.09.2021 passed by this Hon ble Court in IA No.84110 of 2021; and/or b. Modify the order dated 21.09.2021 passed by this Hon ble Court in IA No.84110 of 2021 in Civil Appeal No.5395 of 2019 and direct the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (East), Karkardooma Courts, Delhi to return/release the original Bank Guarantee No. OGT0005210053201 dated 23.0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... audulently allowed movement of collaterals. It has been submitted that although the matter is still under investigation but prima facie view of EOW and SFIO are both clearly against the ISSL/Respondent No.1 and Allied Financial Services Pvt. Ltd./Respondent No.4. It is contended that the applicant/Respondent No.5 is incurring huge expenses/costs by furnishing bank guarantee and the alternative provided by order dated 21.09.2021 to furnish bank guarantee for a sum of ₹ 100 Crores and further to furnish security to the extent of ₹ 300 Crores of unencumbered asset is inequitable and unreasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case, as admittedly the securities/mutual funds belong to the applicant/Respondent No.5, who should ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion is with regard to the mode and manner of the securities to be furnished by the applicant/Respondent No.5. It is not disputed that the petitioner has, in terms of the order dated 16.03.2021, complied with the condition of furnishing bank guarantee of ₹ 344.07 Crores. 11. In paragraph 20 of this application filed by the applicant/Respondent No.5, it is stated that the applicant is a public limited company, having sound financials with a strong balancesheet and other financial statements (assets of INR 18,556 Crores and turnover of INR 8,779 Crores during financial year 202021). The same is not denied by the other parties who have filed their respective replies to this application. 12. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
