C.W.P NO. 4812 OF 2009 1 HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P NO. 4812 OF 2009 DECIDED ON : 10.07.2009 GSKM Properties ...Petitioner versus IFCI Ltd. and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH Present : Mr. Alok Jagga, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Chetan Mittal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vishal Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent Nos.1&2 Mr. Puneet Bali, Advocate for respondent No.3 Mr. Anand Chhibar, Advocate for respondent No.4. JASBIR SINGH, J. (ORAL) On 7th July, 2009 following order was passed by this Court:- Petitioner is stated to be a partnership firm. This writ petition has been filed to lay challenge to sale of the property, mortgaged by respondent No.4, with respondent No.1, on 16.2.2009. The property was sold for an amount of Rs.two crore ninety lacs. In this writ petition, it has been stated that the property has been sold at a lesser price, whereas the price is much more. To show its bona fide, the petitioner, in this writ petition in paragraph No.11 ground (ii) has stated as under:- “ The contention may be tested on the fact, that the petitioner is ready to pay an amount of Rs.3.25 crores i.e. Rs.35 lacs over and above the bid of respondent No.3. In case, the C.W.P NO. 4812 OF 2009 2 respondent No.1 had received only one bid in pursuance to sale notice of the property which is located at the heart of city of Malerkotla it was imperative upon respondent No.1 to re-advertise the property by proper advertisement in the locality of Malerkotla itself.” Taking note of above said averment, status quo order was passed on 26.3.2009 by this Court. That court was made applicable to respondent No.5 also, the purchaser. Vide order dated 20.4.2009, when written statement was filed, objection was raised regarding locus standi of the petitioner to maintain this writ petition. Question was also raised regarding financial soundness of the petitioner. In view of the above, vide order dated 19.5.2009, the petitioner was directed to file an affidavit as to within how much days, it shall deposit an amount of Rs.3.25 crores. In response to above said order, affidavit dated 25.5.2009 was filed by Gian Chand, partner of the petitioner firm. Paragraph no.3 of the affidavit, reads thus:- “That the deponent undertakes to deposit the bid amount of Rs.3.25 crore for purchase of the property of respondent No.4 in pursuance to the tender issued by the respondent No.1 for the property annexed in Annex.I and II by 05.07.2009.” Taking note of the affidavit filed on 25.5.2009, following order was passed by this Court:- “The petitioner shall bring a Demand Draft of Rs.3.25 crore in favour of the IFCI Limited on the adjourned date, however, without prejudice to the legal rights of the parties. It is made clear that if the petitioner does C.W.P NO. 4812 OF 2009 3 not bring the Demand Draft, the writ petition shall be dismissed with exemplary costs.” Petitioner was directed to bring a demand draft of Rs.3.25 crore in favour of the IFCI Limited today in Court. Instead of bringing that amount, the petitioner has filed an application bearing No.10861 of 2009 stating that in view of the intervening circumstances, it is not possible for it to deposit amount, in question. It has been stated that after issuance of notice of motion by this Court, the sale was confirmed and possession was delivered to the purchaser. When matter is pending in Court such acts do not make any difference. It appears that the petitioner is trying to wriggle out from the undertaking given by it, in this Court in the writ petition and also in the affidavit. At the time of arguments today, a question was raised regarding financial soundness of the petitioner. To know whether offer made by the petitioner was a genuine one or it was only an attempt to delay the proceedings, the petitioner is directed to put on record copies of the Income Tax returns filed by it in the last 3 years. The petitioner is further directed to put on record statement showing as to how much amount is available with it in the Bank. At the time of arguments, Mr. Jagga has stated that the petitioner has more than Rs.one crore with it and rest of the amount was to be arranged from the financial institutions. To know above said fact, the petitioner is directed to file an affidavit of its partner. Adjourned to 10.7.2009. It is made clear that if the averments made by the petitioner are found to be incorrect, this writ petition shall be dismissed and an appropriate action will be taken against it for filing a false affidavit. Last opportunity is granted to the C.W.P NO. 4812 OF 2009 4 petitioner to bring a demand draft of Rs.3.25 crore, as undertaken by it, in court, on the date fixed. The petitioner is further directed to keep the Bank Pass-Books ready for Court's perusal. Now Shri Jagga says that petitioner wants to withdraw this writ petition. This Court is convinced that the petitioner had told lies to this Court to get undue benefit; When its bona fides and financial status was questioned, it is running away by withdrawing this writ petition. As prayed, this writ petition is ordered to be withdrawn subject to payment of cost of Rs.20,000/-, to be paid by the petitioner. The amount be deposited with Punjab State Legal Services Authority. If amount is not paid within a period of one month, then Secretary, Punjab State Legal Services Authority shall move an application for execution of this order. (JASBIR SINGH) JUDGE 10.07.2009 shonkar