IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2009 / 18TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 32543 of 2007(Y) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- M/S. SIGNORE TRADIING COMPANY LTD., NO.3, 6TH CROSS AGB, SECOND PHASE, BANGALORE-560 096 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY, MR.T.VAMAN RAO. BY ADV. MR.P.GOPINATH MENON RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE KERALA STATE DRUGS AND PHARMACEUTICALS LTD., KALAVOOR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SMITHA. R2 BY ADV. MR.B.SAJEEV KUMAR,SC,DRUGS & PHARMACEUTICALS. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 32543/2007-Y APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 15/01/2002 ALONG WITH THE FORM OF AGREEMENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 25/04/2006, TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE THIS LETTER DATED 30/06/2006 FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THE LEDGER ACCOUNT IN RESPECT OF THE PETITIONER FOR THE PERIOD FROM 01/04/2001 TO 18/09/2004. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R2(a): COPY OF THE GO (RT)437/06/ID DATED 18/09/2007 PUBLISHED IN THE KERALA GAZETTE DATED 19/09/2007. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 32543 of 2007 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 8th June, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a Company which supplied materials to the 2nd respondent, which is a Company, of which shares are owned by the Government of Kerala. Their grievance in this writ petition is that the amounts due to them for supply of materials to the 2nd respondent- Company are not being paid. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: “(i) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 2nd respondent to pay the admitted amounts due to the petitioner, reflected in the ledger account maintained by the 2nd respondent within a time limit that may be fixed by this Honourable Court. (ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 2nd respondent to pay back to the petitioner the earnest money deposited by the petitioner, namely, Rs. 52,568/- in respect of the Vitamin-A Division & Rs. 43,700/- in respect of the Formulation Division of the 2nd respondent. (iii) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to declare that the action of the 2nd respondent in not making payments to the petitioner is illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of the fundamental rights of the share holders of the petitioner Company. (iv) to permit the petitioner to raise his claim for interest and/or damages for belated payments in appropriate proceedings before a competent civil court.” 2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent, in which it is admitted that certain amounts are due to the petitioner from the 2nd respondent-Company. But their contention is that due to acute financial crisis, they are unable to pay the same. It is further submitted that the 2nd respondent- Company has been declared by the Government as a 'relief undertaking' in accordance with the provisions of the Kerala Relief Undertakings (Special W.P.C. No. 32543/07. -: 2 :- Provisions) Act, 1961, as a result of which the recovery of debts against the 2nd respondent-Company is temporarily prohibited during the period of currency of the notification. 3. The petitioner admits that in so far as the notification is in force, the petitioner cannot take any coercive proceedings for recovery of the amounts due. Therefore, the petitioner now submits that the 2nd respondent may be directed to prepare a list of creditors in accordance with the priority of amounts becoming due and as and when the period of notification under the Act is over, direct the 2nd respondent-Company to pay off the amounts due to its debtors in the order of priority of amounts becoming due. 4. I have heard both sides. 5. In so far as the notification under the Act is in force, no proceedings can be initiated against the 2nd respondent for recovery of the amounts due. If that be so, no writ petition would lie for the purpose of directing the 2nd respondent to pay off the amounts due. As far as the suggestion made by the petitioner is concerned, I am not inclined to exercise my discretionary jurisdiction in view of the circumstances which the second respondent-Company is in. In any event, in so far as the 2nd respondent-Company is in a financial crisis necessitating declaration as a relief undertaking under the Act, it would not be proper for this Court to interfere at this stage when the proceedings for revival of the Company by resort to proceedings under the Act is pending. Therefore, I am not inclined to exercise my discretionary jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner and accordingly the writ petition is dismissed. W.P.C. No. 32543/07. -: 3 :- I make it clear that disposal of this writ petition would not stand in the way of the petitioner seeking appropriate reliefs before the appropriate forum as and when the embargo under the Act on account of declaration of the 2nd respondent as a relief undertaking goes. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/