Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 519 (JHR)

Anjania Consultancy v. State of Jharkhand

2011-06-16

DHIRUBHAI NARANBHAI PATEL

body2011
JUDGMENT D.N. Patel, J. 1. Having heard counsel for both the sides and looking to the contentious issues raised in these writ petitions about the allotment of the industrial plot No. 35, Large Sector, Adityapur Industrial Area Jamshedpur, which was originally alloted to Indo Deutsche Metallo Chimique Ltd. (hereinafter to be referred as "IDMCL" for the the sake of brevity), was on lease for the period of thirty years. The lesser is Adityapur Industrial Area Development Authority and the original lessee is IDMCL. The lease was executed in the year, 1995 on the basis of promise that industry will be started. Never such effective industry was started on the aforesaid industrial plot and therefore, it appears that as per Section 6(2-a) of the Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority Act, 1974, the lease was cancelled on 10th May, 2006, but, during this intervening period from 1995 to 2005, it appears that a letter was written by the Adityapur Industrial Area Development Authority that the lease hold land can be put as a security and loan can be obtained from a financial institution. 2. This letter is on record which is dated 8th January, 1998. Counsels for both the sides have read and re-read Clauses of this letter including paragraph Nos. 3 and 4 thereof. On the basis of the aforesaid letter original allottee i.e. IDMCL applied for a loan from Dena Bank and a sizeable amount was obtained towards loan by the original allottee. The loan was obtained of Rs. 5700 lakhs. The Dena Bank thereafter in pursuance of Section 5(1-b) of the Secularization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Banks Act, 2002 transfered such financial assets to the Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited, which is a Petitioner of W.P.(C) No. 894 of 2011. Thus, the Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited is stepping in the shoes of the Dena Bank. Thus, the Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited is stepping in the shoes of the Dena Bank. The aforesaid company i.e. Asset Reconstruction Company in pursuance of Section 9(b) of the Act, 2002 to be read with the Secularization Companies and Reconstruction Companies (Reserve Bank) Guidelines and Directions, 2003 and the Master Circular on direction/instruction issued to the Secularization Companies/Reconstruction Companies bearing reference No. RBI/2008-2009/13 DNBS (PD) CC No. 11/SCRC/0.30.000/2008-2009 dated July 01, 2008 issued by the Reserve Bank of India in terms of paragraph 7(2) of the Secularization Companies and Reconstruction Companies (Reserve Bank) Guidelines and Directions, 2003 advertised in newspapers for fetching the highest price for giving sub lease for remaining period of the aforesaid industrial plot at Aditypur Industrial Area. 3. In exercise of the aforesaid powers by the Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited (Petitioner of W.P.(C) No. 894 of 2011), Adhunik Power & Natural Resources Limited offered Rs. 806 lakhs which has been accepted by the Asset Reconstruction Company Limited and the interest in the aforesaid industrial plot was assigned to Adhunik Power & Natural Resources Limited. 4. It further appears that Adityapur Industrial Area Development Authority which has already cancelled the lease has now recommended one Anjania Consultancy Private Limited (Petitioner of W.P.(C) No. 1492 of 2011) for the allotment of this industrial plot, in question. This Company is also claiming for the plot, in question, by way of separate writ petition. 5. There is one more interesting feature in these writ petitions, who is Petitioner of the present writ petition. This Petitioner is in possession of the neighbouring industrial plot upon which they are running their industry This present Petitioner needs expansion. Project report has been submitted to Adityapur Industrial Area Development Authority and to such other various authorities. This Petitioner is also claiming the plot, in question, and now, they are agreeing for public auction also because they want to offer higher price than Adhunik Power & Natural Resources Limited has offered. 6. Thus, there are more than one claimants i.e. the present Petitioner as well as Adhunik Power & Natural Resources Limited, which is also a good running company and they have also a separate industry established within the State and out of the State also. Likewise, Anjania Consultancy Private Limited, which has been recommended by AIADA, is also claiming for the very same plot. They are also offering more than Adhunik. Likewise, Anjania Consultancy Private Limited, which has been recommended by AIADA, is also claiming for the very same plot. They are also offering more than Adhunik. Power & Natural Resources Limited. On the other hand, Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited is ready and willing to make the payment or legal dues to AIADA. 7. It is vehemently contended by the counsels for the AIADA that there is no mortgage deed at all in favour of the Dena Rank much less, it is registered mortgage document and never the industrial plot, in question, was put as a Security through the registered mortgage deed and therefore, there is no question of any right whatsoever arises of Dena Bank and much less, of Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited and therefore, there is no right, title and interest by the Adhunik Power & Natural Resources Limited and it is further submitted by the counsel for the AIADA that they want to hold public auction for fetching the highest price of the industrial plot, in question, for fresh allotment. Moreover, the original allottee i.e. IDMCL has never submitted the necessary documents to the Dena Bank for getting loan of Rs. 5700 lakhs and it is further submitted assertively that either by way of fraud or under collusion and/ or conspiracy such a sizeable amount of loan of Rs. 5700 lakhs was given to the IDMCL and therefore, let the Dena Bank may be joined as party Respondent in all the aforesaid matters so that they can bring on record the terms and conditions for grant of loan and whether the Dena Bank has checked any viability of the unit i.e. IDMCL, any project report, any capacity of IDMCL before granting such a huge loan which otherwise, Dena Bank is checking, had a loan would have been given to the other company. Unless the Dena Bank is joined as party-Respondent, these facts cannot be brought on record because Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited, which is stepping shoes to the Dena Bank, has not brought on record, that which are those documents, the Dena Bank, is generally checking before granting loan of such a sizeable amount, over and above security. 8. Unless the Dena Bank is joined as party-Respondent, these facts cannot be brought on record because Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited, which is stepping shoes to the Dena Bank, has not brought on record, that which are those documents, the Dena Bank, is generally checking before granting loan of such a sizeable amount, over and above security. 8. In view of these facts, I hereby, direct the Petitioners to join "Dena Bank, having its head office at Dena Corporate Centre, C-10, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai (Maharashtra)" as party Respondent No. 7 in W.P.(C) No. 1249 of 2011 and likewise, the aforesaid Dena Bank will also be joined a party-Respondent in other writ petitions also by the respective Petitioners. 9. Amendment shall be carried out with read ink, during course of the day. 10. Notice to the newly joined party Respondent in all the aforesaid matters to be served by ordinary process, for which, talbana etc must be filed within ten days from today. 11. Notice is made returnable on 21st July, 2011. 12. Earlier order of status quo granted vide order dated 16th March, 2011 shall continue to be operative till the next date of hearing.