AJN 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO.447 OF 2008 IN COMPANY PETITION NO.779 OF 2000 Sriman Organic Chemical Industries Ltd. .... Appellants Vs. Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd. .... Respondents Mr. Shailesh Shah i/b S.K. Srivastav & Co. for the appellants. Mr. A. Davar i/b Crawford Bayley & Co. for the respondents. CORAM : SMT. RANJANA DESAI & K.K. TATED, JJ. DATED : 10TH DECEMBER, 2008. P.C. :- 1. In this appeal, order dated 4/9/2008 passed by learned Single Judge on Company Petition No.779 of 2000 is under challenge. By the impugned order, learned Single Judge has directed the appellants to deposit a sum of Rs.60 lakhs in this court within a period of eight weeks from the date of the order failing which, the company petition is to stand admitted. Learned Single Judge has AJN 2 further directed that in case the said amount is so deposited, then the company petition to stand dismissed and the respondents to file a suit within a period of four weeks from the date of the communication of the deposit by the advocate for the appellants to the advocate for the respondents. Learned Single Judge has further observed that if such a suit is filed, then the deposit will go to the credit of the said suit, but if the suit is not filed within the stipulated period, the appellants will be at liberty to withdraw the amount after the expiry of the aforesaid period. 2. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants at some length. Basic grievance of learned counsel for the appellants is that learned Single Judge's order directing the appellants to deposit Rs.60 lakhs is harsh and not justified. Learned counsel submitted that learned Single Judge has in his order accepted that the appellants are entitled to debit of an amount of Rs.56,75,249/-. He has, therefore, deducted the said amount from the total claim of the respondents and directed the appellants to deposit an amount of Rs.60 lakhs. Learned counsel drew our attention to the statement of summary of balance as on 15/9/1999 maintained by the appellants which is at Ex-A to the Company Petition No.799 of AJN 3 2000. He pointed out that this statement shows that an amount of Rs.26,26,814/- and a further amount of Rs.3,63,186/- is recovered by the respondents. He submitted that learned Single Judge has overlooked this amount. He submitted that if this amount is taken into account, the alleged liability of the appellants would be much less. Learned counsel pointed out that the statement of summary of balance referred to hereinabove shows that the respondent has charged delayed payment charges of Rs.44,28,283/-. Obviously, therefore, the respondent has charged interest at 24% per annum. Learned counsel submitted that there was no agreement to pay interest and such excessive interest could not have been charged. He submitted that the amount of interest is disputed. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents has seriously disputed the submissions of learned counsel for the appellants. We feel that looking to the nature of the dispute, learned Single Judge's order merits no interference, except so far as the quantum of deposit is concerned. Learned Single Judge's order directing the appellants to deposit Rs.60 lakhs needs to be modified. We feel that deposit of an amount of Rs.35 lakhs would serve the ends of justice. Hence, the impugned order is modified to the extent that instead of AJN 4 Rs.60 lakhs, the appellants shall deposit an amount of Rs.35 lakhs within a period of 12 weeks from today. Rest of the order is maintained. The appeal is disposed of in the aforestated terms. [SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J.] [K.K. TATED, J.]