Bombay High Court
YOGESH PRAKASH KELAversusHIGH COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION THROUGH PROTHONOTARY AND SENIOR MASTER
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court held that, having set aside the contempt order and the deposit direction, the Official Liquidator must refund the amount deposited by the Applicants, with interest, while permitting the balance to be reclaimed from the Prothonotary.
Summary
The Applicants, who were earlier held guilty of civil contempt and ordered to deposit Rs.5 crore with the Official Liquidator, filed an interim application seeking refund of the Rs.1.5 crore they had already paid after the higher court set aside the contempt order and the deposit direction. The Court noted that the judgment of 23 December 2025, which annulled the penal directions except a nominal fine, had attained finality, and therefore the deposited amount should be returned. The Official Liquidator argued that a refund would not bar further legal action, but the Court held that the refund does not prejudice any such proceedings. Consequently, the Court directed the Official Liquidator to refund Rs.1.30 crore with interest to the authorized Applicant and allowed the remaining Rs.20 lakh to be claimed from the Prothonotary. The interim application was disposed with these directions.
Issues considered
- Whether the Applicants are entitled to a refund of the amount deposited under the contempt order that has been set aside.
- Whether the Official Liquidator may retain the deposited amount or pursue further proceedings despite a refund order.
- Whether the Court can direct the Prothonotary to refund the balance amount deposited with the Court.
Subjects
- civil contempt
- interim order
- refund of deposit
- official liquidator
- stay of judgment
- appeal
- contempt of court
- interest
Judgment
901-IA-2036-2026.DOC
Rekha Patil
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2036 OF 2026
IN
APPEAL NO. 61 OF 2026
IN
COMPANY PETITION NO. 149 OF 2012
Yogesh Prakash Kela & Ors. …Applicants
In the matter between
Yogesh Prakash Kela & Ors. …Petitioners
Versus
High Court on its Own Motion through …Respondents
Prothonotary & Senior Master & Ors.
Mr.Kunal Mehta with Mr. Mohit Khanna, Mahesh D., Kunal Chheda
i/b Kunal Chheda, for the Applicants.
Mr. Anirudh Hariani, Advocate for the Official Liquidator.
Mr. Chetan Shelke, Dy. Official Liquidator, present.
CORAM: SUMAN SHYAM &
ADVAIT M. SETHNA, JJ.
DATED: 10th JULY, 2026.
PC:-
1. This Interim Application has been filed on behalf of the five
Appellants in Appeal (L) No.9967 if 2925, seeking refund of the
amount of money deposited by them as a pre-condition laid down
by this Court, for obtaining an interim order of stay in respect of
the Judgment and Order dated 18 th March, 2025, passed by the
learned single Judge in suo motu Show Cause Notice No. 4 of
2019 in Official Liquidator’s Report No. 158 of 2019 in Company
Application No. 708 of 2018 in Company Petition No. 149 of 2012,
REKHA whereby, all the five Applicants were found to be guilty of having
PRAKASH
PATIL
Digitally signed
by REKHA
PRAKASH PATIL
Date: 2026.07.14
17:16:06 +0530
Page 1 of 4
901-IA-2036-2026.DOC
committed civil contempt of the Court and accordingly, they were
inter alia, directed to be detained in Civil Prison and also to
deposit Rs. 5,00,00,000/- (Rupees Five Crores) with the Official
Liquidator within a period of six weeks, so as to purge the
contempt.
2. Assailing the order dated 18th March, 2025, passed by the
learned Single Judge, the five Applicants, as Appellant Nos. 1 to 5,
along with M/s. Govind Industries Private Limited as the Appellant
No.6, had preferred Appeal (L) No. 9967 of 2025 in Company
Petition No.149 of 2012 with Interim Application (L) No. 9970 of
2025. By various orders passed by this Court in the aforesaid
Appeal commencing from 17th April, 2025 till 10th July, 2025, the
order of interim protection granted to the Applicants was extended
from time to time subject, however, to deposit of certain amounts
being part of the sum of Rs.5,00,00,000/- (Rupees Five Crores).
3. Pursuant to such interim order (s) passed by this Court, the
Applicant No.1, on behalf of the Applicants/Appellants in the
Appeal (L) No. 9967 of 2025, had deposited a total amount of
Rs.1,50,00,000/- out of which, a sum of Rs.1,30,00,000/- had
been deposited with the Official Liquidator whereas, the balance
amount of Rs.20,00,000/- has been deposited with the
Prothonotary and Senior Master of this Court.
4. The Judgment and Order dated 18 th March, 2025, passed by
the learned single Judge in Company Petition No. 149 of 2012 and
the connected proceedings, was set aside by this Court by the
Judgment dated 23rd December, 2025 passed in Appeal (L) No.
9967 of 2025, whereby, save and except, maintaining the direction
Page 2 of 4
901-IA-2036-2026.DOC
to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- by each of the Applicants, all other
directions imposing penal measures upon the Applicants including
the direction to make a deposit the sum of Rs.5,00,00,000/-
(Rupees Five Crores) with the Official Liquidator has been set
aside by this Court.
5. It is the case of the applicant that the order dated 23 rd
December, 2025, has attained finality. Therefore, the sum of
Rs.1,50,00,00/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty Lakhs )deposited by the
Applicants is liable to be returned to them without any further
delay, as otherwise, it would cause serious prejudice to their
interest.
6. The assertions made by the Applicant, more particularly,
those in para 1 of the Application, have not been denied or
disputed by the Official Liquidator represented by the learned
Counsel Mr. Anirudh Hariani. However, the learned Counsel
representing the Official Liquidator submits that, even if the
amount is refunded to the Applicant, the same ought not to
preclude the Official Liquidator from initiating any further legal
proceeding against the Applicants and/or the Appellants in Appeal
(L) No. 9967 of 2025, in accordance with law as well as in terms of
the leave granted by this Court in paragraph No. 38 of the
Judgment and Order dated 23rd December, 2025.
7. Such a submission Mr. Anirudh Hariani has not been
contested by learned Counsel Mr. Kunal Mehta appearing for the
Applicant. Moreover, in view of the observations made in
paragraph 38 of the Judgment and Order dated 23 rd December,
Page 3 of 4
901-IA-2036-2026.DOC
2025, there can be no embargo upon the Official Liquidator to
take appropriate steps in the matter, in accordance with law.
8. Situated thus, we are of the view that the direction, as
sought in this Interim Application, deserves to be issued by this
Court.
9. We, accordingly, direct that the Official Liquidator shall
refund the sum of Rs.1,30,00,000/- ( Rupees One Crore Thirty
Lakhs), alog with accrued interest, lying in his custody, to the
Applicant No.1, viz. Yogesh Prakash Kela, who has been authorized
by the other Applicants, to receive the amount on their behalf.
10. Insofar as the balance amount of Rs.20,00,000/- is
concerned, the Applicant is granted leave to approach the
Prothonotary and Senior Master of this Court by making
appropriate application seeking refund/withdrawal of that
amount.
11. If, such an application is made by the Applicant, after
verifying the identity of the Applicant as well as the authority, if
any, issued by the other Applicants to receive the amount, the
learned Prothonotary and Senior Master of this Court would
refund the said amount, with accrued interest, to the Applicant, in
accordance with law, within four weeks from the date of the
receipt of the refund request.
12. With the above observations, the Interim Application stands
disposed of.
(ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.) (SUMAN SHYAM, J.)
{
Page 4 of 4
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.