Bombay High Court Dismisses Application for Recall/Review of Order Allowing Secured Creditor to Release Leasehold Rights. Applicant, an ex-director and guarantor, lacked locus standi as he was not a party to the original application and no fraud or mistake was established.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY
  • 205
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The judgment concerns an application filed by Mr Shashikant Pasari, an ex-director and guarantor of Rajan (Textile) Mills Pvt Ltd (in liquidation), seeking recall/review of an order dated 12th February 2013 passed by the Bombay High Court in Company Application No.653 of 2012. The original order allowed the Central Bank of India, a secured creditor, to release its claims on leasehold rights in respect of certain properties in favour of the owners upon payment of Rs.1.40 Crores, and directed the Official Liquidator to relinquish the leasehold rights. The applicant claimed to be a major shareholder and creditor of the company. The court examined whether the applicant had locus standi to seek recall/review, as he was not a party to the original application. The court held that the applicant failed to establish any fraud or mistake that would warrant recall/review, and dismissed the application. The judgment emphasizes that a person not party to the original proceedings cannot seek recall/review unless fraud or mistake is shown.

Headnote

A) Company Law - Locus Standi - Recall/Review of Order - An ex-director and guarantor who was not a party to the original application has no locus standi to seek recall/review of the order unless fraud or mistake is established. The court held that the applicant failed to demonstrate any fraud or mistake and thus the application was dismissed. (Paras 1-10)

B) Company Law - Secured Creditor - Release of Leasehold Rights - The court allowed the secured creditor to release its claims on leasehold rights in favour of the owners upon acceptance of a sum of Rs.1.40 Crores, and directed the Official Liquidator to relinquish the leasehold rights. (Paras 1-2)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the applicant, an ex-director and guarantor, has locus standi to seek recall/review of an order passed in an application to which he was not a party, and whether any fraud or mistake is established.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Application dismissed

Law Points

  • Locus standi
  • Recall/Review of order
  • Fraud or mistake
  • Secured creditor rights
  • Leasehold rights
  • Company in liquidation
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2013 LawText (BOM) (07) 86

Company Application No.96 of 2013 in Company Application No.653 of 2013 in Company Petition No.20 of 1984

2013-07-30

R.D. Dhanuka

Shri Cherag Balsara a/with Luann Crasto i/by M/s K.Ashar & Co. for the applicant, Mr V.K. Nair for Respondent No.2, Mr Cyrus Ardeshir i/by O.L., Mrs R.Sutar, A.O.L., Mr A.Y. Sakhare, Senior Advocate i/by R.K. Bobade for Interveners

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Application for recall/review of an order passed in a company application

Remedy Sought

Recall/review of order dated 12th February 2013

Filing Reason

Applicant, an ex-director and guarantor, sought to challenge the order allowing release of leasehold rights

Previous Decisions

Order dated 12th February 2013 in Company Application No.653 of 2012 allowed Central Bank of India to release claims on leasehold rights

Issues

Whether the applicant has locus standi to seek recall/review of the order Whether any fraud or mistake is established to warrant recall/review

Submissions/Arguments

Applicant argued that he is an ex-director, guarantor, major shareholder, and creditor of the company Respondents contended that the applicant was not a party to the original application and no fraud or mistake was shown

Ratio Decidendi

A person not party to the original proceedings cannot seek recall/review of an order unless fraud or mistake is established. The applicant failed to demonstrate any fraud or mistake.

Judgment Excerpts

By this application filed by Mr Shashikant Pasari who is a ex Director of Rajan (Textile) Mills Pvt Ltd (in liquidation)... seeks recall/review of the order dated 12th February, 2013 passed by this Court in Company Application No.653 of 2012.

Procedural History

The applicant filed Company Application No.96 of 2013 seeking recall/review of an order dated 12th February 2013 passed in Company Application No.653 of 2012, which was filed by Central Bank of India. The original order allowed the bank to release claims on leasehold rights. The court heard the application and dismissed it.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Application for Recall/Review of Order Allowing Secured Creditor to Release Leasehold Rights. Applicant, an ex-director and guarantor, lacked locus standi as he was not a party to the original application and no fraud or m...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Partition Suit — Sale Deed Held as Security Not Absolute Sale. Transaction dated 25.3.1968 was without consideration and executed as security for advance, not an absolute sale.