Supreme Court calls ₹75 lakh direct payment to plaintiff 'unwarranted'

Who it concerns: Petitioners/Appellants: Hiroo Hotchand Advani (4th Defendant) and Integrated Finance Company Limited (Plaintiff). Respondents: Integrated Finance Company Limited and others; Hiroo Hotchand Advani and others. Bench: Justice Atul S. Chandurkar.

What the court decided

• The Court upheld the Madras High Court's decision to condone the 423-day delay in filing the application to set aside the ex parte decree.
• The Court modified the condition by directing that the ₹75,00,000 deposit remain with the High Court Registry (invested in a fixed deposit) rather than being paid directly to the plaintiff.
• The Court clarified that the observations made by the High Court in the impugned judgment shall not influence the Single Judge when considering the merits of the prayer to set aside the ex parte decree.
• The Court reserved the liberty for the plaintiff to request appropriate conditions regarding the stay of execution of the ex parte decree, leaving that aspect open for consideration.

Also in the document

• The Court noted that the ₹75,00,000 sum had already been deposited with the High Court pursuant to an earlier interim order dated 10.09.2024.
• The Court stated that the discretion exercised by the High Court in condoning the delay was not arbitrary or irrational to warrant interference under Article 136 of the Constitution.
• The Court found the direction to pay the amount directly to the plaintiff 'unwarranted' at this stage, given the defendant's pending application to set aside the decree.