w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Radhaswami Premises LLP, through its Designated Partner Vikas Kanchal, Jaipur & Others Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT), New Delhi & Others

    Civil Writ Petition No. 5303, 5491 & 6448 of 2011

    Decided On, 28 September 2021

    At, High Court of Rajasthan Jaipur Bench

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

    For the Appearing Parties: Rajendra K. Salecha, Tanisha Khulchandani, Swadeep Singh Hora, B.C. Jain, R.K. Swami, Advocates.



Judgment Text

The applicant erstwhile Radha Swami Premises Pvt. Ltd (petitioner herein) has filed the present application, inter alia, seeking substitution of its name as its legal status has changed from a 'private limited company' to a 'limited liability partnership' (LLP).

For the reasons stated, the application is allowed. The name of the petitioner shall stands substituted as 'Radha Swami Premises Limited Liability Partnership'.

The amended cause title filed alongwith the application, is taken on record.

IA Nos.1/2021 in SBCWP Nos.5491/2011 & 6448/2011:

The applicant erstwhile Radha Swami Premises Pvt. Ltd (one of the respondent herein) has filed the present applications, inter alia, seeking substitution of its name as its legal status has changed from a 'private limited company' to a 'limited liability partnership' (LLP).

For the reasons stated, the applications are allowed. The name of the respondent Radha Swami Premises Pvt. Ltd shall stand substituted as 'Radha Swami Premises Limited Liability Partnership'.

The amended cause titles filed alongwith the applications, are taken on record.

SBCWP Nos.5303/2011, 5491/2011 & 6448/2011:

1. The above captioned writ petitions have been filed by the respective petitioners laying challenge to the order dated 9.3.2011 passed by the learned Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the DRAT') in appeal No.299/2010.

2. The appeal aforesaid was filed by Shri Girish Lalwani and Sh. Jai Kishan Lalwani claiming themselves to be interested parties.

3. The DRAT allowed the appeal and set aside the order dated 31.3.2005 passed by the learned Recovery Officer and the order passed by the learned Presiding Officer of the DRT on 19.6.2008.

4. Without going into the details of the case any further, suffice it to mention that the parties to the litigation, who are also parties to the Civil Original Suit No.308/2014 have entered into compromise. A certified copy thereof has been placed for perusal of the Court, the same is taken on record.

5. The relevant part of the terms of the compromise is extracted hereinfra:

“LANGUAGE”

6. Learned counsel for the rival parties are ad-idem that in view of the compromise entered between the parties, the order of the DRAT dated 9.3.2011 needs to be set aside, therefore the same is hereby set aside.

7. As a consequence of setting aside of the order of the DRAT, the order of learned Recovery Officer dated 31.3.2005, so also, the order passed by the Presiding Officer of DRT dated 19.6.2008 are restored.

8. The rights of the parties in relation to the subject property, namely, 'A-62, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur' shall

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

be governed by the order of the learned Recovery Officer dated 31.3.2005 as upheld by the Presiding Officer of DRT dated 19.6.2008. 9. All the writ petitions are disposed of in above terms. 10. All the interlocutory applications including stay applications are also disposed of accordingly.
O R