R.K. Merathia, J. - (1.) Heard Mr. Chatterjee, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.K. Mehta, learned counsel for the respondents and accordingly this case is being disposed of at the admission stage.
(2.) IN substance, petitioner has challenged the demand raised by the respondents. One M/s. M.K. (Steel) Industries took loan from the respondents for it's industry. Ultimately, as the dues of the respondents was not paid, tenders were invited for sale of the said unit. Shri R.K. Choudhary, who is now one of the Directors of the petitioner -Company, was the highest bidder. The bid amount was increased on further negotiation and terms and conditions of sale were resolved Rs. 2.75 lacks was to be paid immediately and Rs. 2.75 lacks was to be paid before the documentation. The balance Rs. 12 lacks was treated as term loan to the petitioner on usual terms and conditions of the respondents and the same was to be repaid in 12 equal half yearly installments starting from June, 1985 and ending in December, 1990. The interest accrued on the said balance of consideration money (i.e. excluding Rs. 2.75 lacs paid initially) from the date of handing over possession till the date of documentation was also to be paid by the petitioner. Current rate of interest was to be charged on the balance amount/outstanding which could be revised by the respondents. Petitioner made payment as per the said agreement and it was put in possession of the unit on 2.11.1983. Mr. Chatterjee submitted that from the very beginning, petitioner is suffering due to the deliberate lapses of the respondents, for the reasons best known to them. After three months, of putting the petitioner in possession a letter was issued on 2.2.1984, asking to obtain draft sale deed. Referring to the statements made in paragraph 12 of the counter affidavit, he submitted that the draft sale deed was not handed over on the purported ground of pendency of a writ petition being CWJC No. 1030 of 1984 (R) filed by the erstwhile owner M.K. (Steels) Industries, whereas it was filed on 16.8.1984 i.e. after more than six months of issuance of the said letter. Moreover, there was no stay and the same was dismissed also on 19.12.1984. He further submitted that in the subsequent writ petition (CWJC No. 420 of 1985) M.K. (Steels), got stay order only on 18.4.1985 and when it was vacated on 4.2.1988 the respondents sent the draft sale deed only by letter dt. 31.3.1988 i.e. after two months of the vacation of stay order and by the time, petitioner could receive it, the said M.K. (Steels) got stay again on 8.4.1988. He submitted that thus the respondents deliberately delayed the documentation.
(3.) HE further submitted that on receipt of the draft sale deed, petitioner objected to the term with regard to the payment of liabilities of electricity incurred by M/s. M.K (Steels) Industries and also to the other term providing payment of half yearly installment of interest calculated at the rate of 14.5%. But without taking any decision on the said objections, the respondents continued calculation of interest in the manner it liked. As advised, petitioner intervened in the said writ petition (CWJC No. 420 of 1985) and prayed for vacating the stay. However, as ordered by this Court, petitioner deposited Rs. 7 lacks and Rs. 6 lacs in March and July, 1996. The said writ petition was ultimately dismissed by order dated 18.5.1999.;