AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
9 paragraphs · 310 wordsDespite our order dated 1.10.2023 in Broadcasting Petition No.602/201,. the Judgment Debtor has not complied with the Judgment and Decree of this Tribunal.
Thereafter settlement was arrived at between the parties to this litigation and out of Rs. 1,99,03,705/-, the Decree Holder has arrived at settlement of Rs.1,20,00,000/- which was payable by the Judgment Debtor in four installments.
It is further submitted by the petitioner that the amount due as in the month of January, 2023 was at Rs.68 Lakhs whereas, the Judgment Debtor has paid Rs. 52 Lakhs.
Counsel for the Judgment Debtor accepts that there is a default on their part and the default is because of financial difficulties of the respondent no.1
Be that as it may, there is no modification application preferred by the Judgment Debtor for modification of our earlier orders. The modification in our order cannot be presumed by the Judgment Debtor.
Moreover, the payment schedule which was agreed upon between the parties to this litigation, was accepted by this Tribunal and upon the promise to make the payment by the respondent – Judgment Debtor, an order was passed that amount due will be paid in four installments.
In view of the aforesaid facts, as the respondent – Judgment Debtor has not made the payment as agreed by the Judgment Debtor, we here by direct Mr. Raj Kumar Mishra and Mrs. Sunita Mishra, Directors of the respondent to remain personally present before this Tribunal at 11 AM on the next date i.e. 31.10.2023.
If our order dated 25.8.2022 passed in Execution Application No.3/2021 is complied with which is about deposition of Rs.50 Lakhs before the Registrar of this Tribunal by way of Demand draft, there is no need to remain personally present by the aforesaid Directors of the respondent.
The matter is adjourned to 31.10.2023.
