A.K. Sinha, J. - (1.) This appeal is preferred against an order passed by the Subordinate Judge, Second Court. Alipore, appointing Joint Receivers ex parte at the instance of the Plaintiff Respondent No. 1, the State Bank of India, in respect of the disputed properties briefly in the following circumstances:
(2.) On November 23, 1972, the Plaintiff State Bank of India instituted a suit in the Original Side of this Court praying for a decree for over rupees 53 lacs and for other reliefs against the present Appellant and also two other Defendants Surinder Paul Mehta and Mrs. Nirmala Devi Mehta. The Plaintiff's case, in short, was that the present Appellant was given overdraft facilities on different accounts for running their business of manufacture of certain chemicals and other things known and named as Sakow Industries Private Ltd. on and from April 11, 1967. This overdraft arrangement was covered by two sets of agreements entered into by and between the Appellant and the State Bank from time to time under which the Appellant pledged or hypothecated all its stocks, machineries, finished goods and assets specified therein at the factory premises and godowns at Kaikhali, Dum Dum, 24 -Parganas, to the Bank by way of first and paramount charge for payment of all moneys that may be due by the Appellant to the State Bank. Some of these documents were registered with the Registrar of Companies, West Bengal. Apart from the factory and godowns at Kaikhali, the Appellant started another factory and also had its godown in places known as 'Trochi' and 'Asavari'. The Appellant also agreed to create mortgages in respect of all its stocks, chemicals, minerals and machineries as and by way of paramount charge for payment of all the moneys that may be so advanced, as aforesaid, by the State Bank of India covered by the overdraft facilities given to it. After appropriating all amounts paid a sum of Rs. 53,05,463 -02 with interest calculated upto October 31, 1972, fell due and owing by the Appellant to the State Bank.
(3.) The Appellant, however, did not find out the ways and means of payment of this amount nor did it execute any deed of mortgage as was agreed to in respect of the properties lying in both the units of Faridabad. On the contrary, the Appellant created a lease of the entire factory and godowns with machineries and materials etc. in favour of another party, the Respondent No. 4 Sakow Industries (Faridabad) Pvt. Ltd. and stopped running its entire business in Faridabad. The Appellant also created a lease in respect of its factory and godowns in favour of a party added as the Defendant No. 4 (Respondent No. 3) known as 'Sakow Trading and Industrial Corporation'. That is how, in short, the first Respondent the State Bank of India became highly apprehensive as their security for payment of huge sums still due and owing by the Appellant was in jeopardy and might be ultimately lost and, in consequence, the first Respondent would suffer irreparable loss and injuries.;