High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh
Case Law Search
M/s Sachdeva Engineers v. Hari Chand Goyal, Director & Ors - COCP-878-2002  RD-P&H 12600 (14 December 2006)
C.O.C.P. No. 878 of 2002
Date of Decision: 21.12.2006.
M/s Sachdeva Engineers
Hari Chand Goyal, Director and others
CORAM : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surya Kant.
Present:- Mr.Deepak Suri,Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr.G.S.Cheema, Sr. DAG Punjab.
Mr.Sunil Chadha, Advocate
for respondent No.3.
Mr.Kunal Dabra, Advocate for
Mr. S.S.Narula, Advocate
for respondent No.5.
SURYA KANT, J.(ORAL)
In deference to the order dated December 15, 2006, learned counsel for respondent No.3 has handed over the Demand Draft No.006206 dated 21.12.2006, drawn at Standard Chartered Bank, SCO No.135-136, Sector 9-C, Chandigarh, for a sum of Rs.3,08,250.00 to learned counsel for the petitioner towards full and final payment of balance amount to which the petitioner is entitled.
In this manner, the undertaking given by the respondents before this court stands complied with. Rather, that respondent No.5 has paid excess amount of Rs.41,750/- to the petitioner which learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to refund to respondent No.5 through his counsel within one week.
In this view of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioner, further, undertakes that the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, filed by the petitioner shall also be withdrawn immediately, but not later than two weeks from today.
Respondent No.4 is brother of respondents No.3 and 5. Prima- facie, he is also equally liable to honour the undertaking given before this Court. However, these proceedings were dropped against him as he was reported to have gone to Uganda. Learned counsel for respondents No.3 and 5 on the other hand state that the said respondent No.4 is presently residing in Delhi. Since, respondents No.3 and 5 have discharged the total liability which includes the share of their brother-respondent No.4, also, they shall be entitled to seek recovery thereof from respondent No.4 to the extent the liability falls to his share in accordance with law and until the said part of liability is discharged by respondent No.4, there shall remain a charge on his assets including his share in the H.No.A/276, New Friends colony, New Delhi.
If respondents No.3 and 5 have any additional claim in respect of the amount paid by them to the petitioner in these proceedings, they shall be entitled to raise such claim before an appropriate forum, if so permissible in law.
In the light of the above noticed subsequent events, undertaking and the statements made on behalf of the parties, no further action is required to be taken in this petition, which is accordingly disposed of.
December 21,2006. JUDGE
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.