XLO INDIA LIMITED AND ANOTHERversusINTERNATIONAL ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED & OTHERS

1096                      [2021]REPORTS
                SUPREME COURT   6 S.C.R. 1096                  [2021] 6 S.C.R.


 A                   XLO INDIA LIMITED AND ANOTHER
                                          v.
         INTERNATIONAL ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY
                   PRIVATE LIMITED & OTHERS
 B                         (Civil Appeal No. 6518 of 2021)
                                OCTOBER 27, 2021.
                   [M. R. SHAH AND A.S. BOPANNA, JJ.]
              Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 – s.25 – Appeal
       arising out of impugned judgment passed by High Court by which
 C
       the High Court dismissed writ petition preferred by appellants
       confirming the order passed by Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal
       (DRAT), Delhi passed in Appeal No.82/2020 – DRAT, Delhi disposed
       of said appeal preferred by respondents maintaining the order of
       attachment of share held by appellant no.1 during pendency of
 D     Appeal No.1/2020 – However, DRAT also directed and observed
       that in the meanwhile recovery proceedings will go on before the
       Recovery Officer who will try to recover the decretal amount in
       accordance with provisions of s.25 of the Recovery of Debts and
       Bankruptcy Act – Appeal No.1/2020 pending consideration by Debts
       Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Jaipur – According to respondent no.1
 E
       approximately a sum of Rs.29 crores was due and payable by
       appellant no.1, which is disputed by appellants, more particularly
       appellant no.1 – Case of appellant no.1 in Appeal No.1/2020 that
       the amount due and payable by appellant no.1 had been paid and
       the question was of discharge of debt in the execution proceedings
 F     – However, at the suggestion of the Court, broad consensus arrived
       at between the parties – Appeal accordingly disposed of, on such
       terms.
             CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 6518
       of 2021.
 G           From the Judgment and Order dated 06.09.2021 of the High Court
       of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur, in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9260
       of 2021.
             Dhruv Mehta, Sr. Adv., Mrs. Suruchi Kasliwal, Shyam Aggarwal,
       Amit Pawan, Hassan Zubair Waris, Ms. Shivangi, Advs. for the
 H     Appellants.
                                      1096
          XLO INDIA LIMITED v. INTERNATIONAL ASSET                              1097
            RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY PVT. LTD.

     K.V. Viswanathan, Sr. Adv., Amarjit Singh Bedi, R.P. Agrawal,              A
Ms. Manisha Agrawal, Ms. Pragati Agrawal, Ms. Priyal Modi, Varun
Chandiok, Ms. Riya Seth, Advs. for the Respondents.
      The Order of the Court was passed by
      M. R. SHAH, J.
                                                                                B
      1. Leave granted.
      2. The present appeal arises out of the impugned judgment and
order dated 06.09.2021 passed by the High Court of Judicature for
Rajasthan at Jaipur in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9260/2021 by which
the High Court has dismissed the said writ petition preferred by the            C
appellants herein confirming the judgment and order passed by the Debts
Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT), Delhi passed in Appeal No.82/
2020.
      3. By judgment and order dated 9.8.2021, the DRAT, Delhi has
disposed of the said appeal preferred by the respondents herein                 D
maintaining the order of attachment of share held by appellant no.1 as
XLO India Limited during the pendency of Appeal No.1/2020. However,
the DRAT has also directed and observed that in the meanwhile recovery
proceedings will go on before the Recovery Officer who will try to recover
the decretal amount in accordance with the provisions of Section 25 of
the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993.                                 E
      4. We have heard Shri Dhruv Mehta, learned senior counsel
appearing on behalf of the appellants and Shri K. V. Viswanathan, learned
senior counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.1 herein.
       5. It is not in dispute that Appeal No.1/2020 is pending consideration
                                                                                F
by the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Jaipur. However, at the same
time, according to respondent no.1 herein approximately a sum of Rs.29
crores is due and payable by appellant no.1, which is disputed by Shri
Dhruv Mehta, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants, more particularly on behalf of appellant no.1.
      6. It appears that the case on behalf of appellant no.1 in Appeal         G
No.1/2020 seems to be that the amount due and payable by appellant
no.1 has been paid and the question is of discharge of debt in the execution
proceedings.
       7. The aforesaid is disputed by learned counsel appearing on behalf
of respondent no.1.                                                             H
1098                SUPREME COURT REPORTS                         [2021] 6 S.C.R.


 A            8. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the respective
       parties and at the suggestion by the Court, there is broad consensus
       between the learned counsel for the parties to dispose of the present
       appeal in the following terms -
             i)       that appellant no.1 to deposit a further sum of Rs.5 crores
 B                    with the Presiding Officer, DRT, Jaipur within a period of
                      four weeks from today, without prejudice to the rights and
                      contentions of appellant no.1 in the pending Appeal No.1/
                      2020;
             ii)      that respondent no.1 may be permitted to withdraw the
 C                    amount of Rs.5 crores to be deposited by appellant no.1, as
                      observed hereinabove along with Rs.1.53 crores with
                      interest accrued thereon which has been deposited by
                      appellant no.1 as a pre-deposit while preferring the Appeal
                      No.1/2020;

 D           iii)     that respondent no.1 may also be permitted to withdraw
                      the amount of Rs.25 lakhs which is lying with the Recovery
                      Officer;
             iv)      that the withdrawal of the aforesaid amount (Rs.5 crores +
                      Rs.1.53 crores with interest accrued thereon + Rs. 25 lakhs)
 E                    by respondent no.1 shall be without prejudice to the rights
                      and contentions of the respective parties in Appeal No.1/
                      2020 as well as subject to the ultimate outcome of the
                      Appeal No.1/2020;
             v)       the DRT, Jaipur may be directed to finally decide and dispose
 F                    of Appeal No.1/2020 at the earliest and preferably within a
                      period of eight weeks from today.
             9. In view of the above broad consensus between the learned
       counsel for the respective parties recorded hereinabove, we dispose of
       the present appeal as under -
 G           a)       That appellant no.1 shall deposit a further sum of Rs.5 crores
                      with the Presiding Officer, DRT, Jaipur within a period of
                      four weeks from today, which shall be without prejudice to
                      the rights and contentions of the respective parties in Appeal
                      No.1/2020 and on such deposit, the respondent no.1 is
                      permitted to withdraw the said amount;
 H
        XLO INDIA LIMITED v. INTERNATIONAL ASSET                                    1099
     RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY PVT. LTD. [M. R. SHAH, J.]

       b)       that respondent no.1 is permitted to withdraw a sum of              A
                Rs.1.53 crores with interest accrued thereon which appellant
                no.1 has deposited as pre-deposit while preferring the Appeal
                No.1/2020;
       c)       that respondent no.1 is also permitted to withdraw the amount
                of Rs.25 lakhs which is lying with the Recovery Officer;            B
       d)       that the aforesaid withdrawal by respondent no.1 shall be
                without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the
                respective parties in Appeal No.1/2020 and subject to the
                ultimate outcome of the Appeal No.1/2020 and that in case
                appellant no.1 succeeds and the order is passed in appeal           C
                against the respondents, the respondents will pay the amount
                paid in excess, if any, within a period of four weeks to
                appellant no.1;
       e)       the DRT, Jaipur is directed to finally decide and dispose of
                Appeal No.1 in accordance with law and on its own merits            D
                within a period of eight weeks from today;
       f)       either of the parties to place copy of the present order before
                the DRT, Jaipur within a period of one week from today;
       g)       the questions of law, if any, are kept open which may be
                considered in appropriate case;                                     E
       h)       the order of attachment of shares held by appellant no.1, as
                confirmed by the DRAT is directed to be continued till the
                final disposal of Appeal No.1/2020. Till Appeal No.1/2020
                is decided and disposed of within the time stipulated
                hereinabove, the further recovery proceedings are directed          F
                to be stayed;
       i)       It is also reported that the appeal by respondent no.1 against
                the order of pre-deposit of Rs.1.53 crores is challenged
                before the DRAT. In view of the aforesaid, the said appeal
                preferred by respondent no.1 before the DRAT challenging            G
                the order of pre-deposit stands disposed of.
            Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of.


Devika Gujral                                                 Appeal disposed of.
                                                                                    H