AMITAVA LALA, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition is made on behalf of a company by the pen of a director with a supporting affidavit of competency dated July 17, 1998, as against the respondents including M/s. Small Industries Development Bank of India (hereinafter called as 'the SIDBI') for the purpose of getting orders in the nature of release of transfer bonds as well as payment of interest from them who are wrongfully withholding the same bonds being property of the petitioners. It is as good as interference with the right of property of the petitioners protected by the Constitution of India.
(2.) THE petitioners contended before this court that in the course of business petitioner No. 1 -company purchased 41 bonds issued by M/s. Small Industries Development Bank of India in its favour aggregating to Rs. 410 lakhs having a face value of Rs. 10 lakhs each. Such purchase occurred in between one Sri Sankarlal Saraff and petitioner No. 1 -company at a consideration of price of Rs. 3,69,00,000 (rupees three crores and sixty -nine lakhs only) on July 1, 1998. Petitioner No. 1 paid the consideration amount by cheque bearing No. 136229, dated July 1, 1998 of Vaisya Bank Ltd., Netaji Subhas Road Branch, Calcutta. The petitioners took delivery of the bonds from such person and deposited in the office of respondent No. 1 for grant of transfer/registration of the bonds in favour of the petitioners. The petitioners requested respondent No. 1 by letter dated July 2, 1998, to issue the interest cheques for the period of June 31, 1997, to June 30, 1998, in his favour. The aforesaid bonds were received by respondent No. 1 on July 2, 1998 ; formal receipt was issued on July 9, 1998. The petitioners, along with the bonds, duly submitted specimen signature of petitioner No. 2 who was the operator to deal with the subject bonds. Respondent No. 1 is also under obligation to pay interest to petitioner No. 1 who is presently the holder of the bonds. The bonds themselves specify the rate of interest, particulars of which are set out in annexure E to the petition.
(3.) THE Union of India, respondent No. 3 stands as guarantor towards the repayment of principal and interest. Respondent No. 1 is required to return the bonds to the petitioners after recording the factors of transfer in its record so that the interest can be received by the petitioner. The transfer is required to be authenticated by respondent No. 1. The respondents are required to transfer the bonds without any delay so that the petitioner can deal with the bonds in the market. The respondents failed and neglected to transfer as well as pay interest to the petitioner without assigning any reason. Subject bonds are 'goods' within the meaning of the Sale of Goods Act. The petitioner being a bona fide purchaser of the bonds for value, is entitled to register the transfer in its name and pay -ment of interest. By withholding the bonds and not paying interest the respondents have deprived the petitioners from using the properties without due sanction of law. The acts of the respondents are violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 300A of the Constitution of India.;