Re: Magnifico Minerals Private Limited (Parliament Street Branch, New Delhi) | Suit filed in City Civil Court Bombay Legal Department- NewDelhi jov2023 2015 ‘rAsset Recovery Department- New Delhi ; CeNishi Kant Gaur ; Mukesh Sharma - Sir/Ma'am, In reference to the trailing mail, please find the requisite point-wise reply in the matter :- Reply to Point No. (a) :- The instruction for filing Appeal to the Order dated 09.11.2020 passed by Hon'ble City Civil Court, At Greater Bombay in the matter of M/s Magnifico Minerals Pvt Ltd was given vide email from Head Office, Legal Dept to Head Office, Asset Recovery Dept on 12.11.2020 attaching therewith a scan copy of Order Sheet dated 09.11.2020 & upon receipt of communication from Zonal Office Asset Recovery Dept on 12.11.2020, Legal Dept NDZO on 13.11.2020 had advised to Parliament Street Branch with a copy to other departments of Z0/HO and as well as Advocate Subhash Menon for filing of appeal before Mumbai High Court immediately. Our Parliamentary Street Branch had forwarded the said mail on 13.11.2020 to Advocate Subhash Menon (with a copy to Other Member Banks) for preparation of draft appeal in the matter, As such no certified copy of detailed order dated 09.11.2020 was provided to our department. We understand from branch correspondence dated 01.07.2022 that Advocate Subhash Menon informed our Parliament Street branch on 10.03.2022 about his detection of cancer and further informed that he has returned all the files to Mumbai South Zone Legal Department. Thereafter, we understand that the concerned branch has sent the mail on 06.04.2022 to the Legal Dept MSZ for the status of the matter as Mr. Subhash Menon has detected cancer and not in position to attend the matter. Thereafter, we sought details of Advocate vide email dated 02.07.2022 from Legal Dept, MSZ to whom the matter is assigned and again on 05.07.2022 & 15.07.2022 and we received confirmation on 15.07.2022 regarding entrustment of matter to Advocate O.A Das. Then, Advocate 0 A Das vide his email dated 15.11.2022 informed the concerned branch that appeal have been prepared and the same is filed on 09.11.2022. Reply to Point No. (b) :- Since, the draft appeal was not received, Parliament Street Branch sent mail to Advocate Subhash Menon on 12.03.2021 to know the status of filing of appeal. Thereafter, Advocate Subhash Menon provided the draft appeal on 04.05.2021 to us and all other concerned department at ZO/HO. The draft was forwarded to the concerned branch for verification of facts & figures, so that the draft can be vetted by the department. On 15.05.2021 branch had sent communication that they have verified facts & figures and made some correction, etc therein. The draft was duly vetted by our department and sent to dealing advocate (with copy to Legal Dept MSZ & Others) on 17.05.2021. Reply to Point No. (c).& (d):: Since, the draft of " Application for delay condonation " has not been sent to us for our vetting, hence we are not in position to reply to the queries raised herein. Reply to Point No. (e)_& (f)_= Bank of India including Bank of Baroda alongwith other member banks have filed joint Original Application (0.A) before Hon'ble DRT, New Delhi (0.4/288/2021 now TA No.250/2022 DRT-IIl Delhi) which is pending. The next date of hearing in the OA is 03.01.2023. With regard to recovery in the account if any, you may please advise the same to Head Office. Reply to Point No. (g)_:- We note that the draft of appeal of Advocate Subhash Menon which was vetted by our department was joint appeal alongwith Bank of Baroda, whereas from the Order dated 19.12.2022, it appears that Bank of Baroda is reflecting as Respondent No, 2. It appears from the order that some changes have been made by Advocate in the appeal without any intimation to our department. Earlier Mr, Dinesh Singh, the then Sr. Manager (Law) PF 193144 was looking after the matter and upon his transfer on elevation, mainly correspondence was made by undersigned & other official time to time. The department was headed by Mr. Dinesh Singh from 09.11.2020 till 18.01.2021. Thereafter, the undersigned is working as Head of the Legal Department P F 168613. With Regards Ajai Bamnehwal Chief Manager(law) Legal Department New Delhi Zone Ph, 011-23755601 From: Asset Recovery Department- New Delhi Sent: 02 January 2023 17:10 To: Legal Department- NewDelhi Ce: Parliament Street; Nishi Kant Gaur; Mukesh Sharma Subject: FW: Magnifico Minerals Private Limited (Parliament Street Branch, New Delhi) | Suit filed in City Civil Court Bombay Sir/Madam, Please refer to the order dated 19.12.2022 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in Interim Application No. 30326 of 2022 in Commercial Appeal from Order (L) No. 27216 of 2022. 2. You are aware that Magnifico Minerals Private Limited had filed a commercial suit before the City Civil Court, Greater Bombay in the year 2020. The Company having its registered office at Delhi and having availed credit facilities under consortium from our bank and Bank of Baroda at New Delhi had managed to move a Notice of Motion in the aforesaid suit at Mumbai and obtained an interim injunction against declaration of Company’s account as fraud and branding the company and publishing its name as fraud till final disposal of the case. However, the court has granted liberty to the banks to proceed against the company through recovery proceedings, attachment, and sale of attached property to recover the dues. The aforesaid order was passed despite the bank challenging the jurisdiction including maintainability of filing of a commercial suit 3. Itis seen that the said interim order restraining the bank from declaring the account as fraud and publishing ete was challenged after a considerable delay of $79 days. While the delay itself is unacceptable, the grounds to condone the delay and the pleadings taken by the bank in this regard had annoyed the Hon’ble High Court which resulted in passing said order. You may also note that though there was covid related restrictions and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has also extended the period of limitation upto 28.02.2022 with an additional 90 days’ time to file, it seems no such pleadings have been taken which could have considerably reduced the period of delay fromtechnical angle. Further, the serious illness of the lawyer resulting in him not filing the appeal is also not narrated properly for condonation of delay. Surprisingly, the delay condonation Petition is filed in such a manner to highlight the administrative delays and factually incorrect statement is also made therein in this regard. It is stated that the lawyer's illness was brought to the knowledge of the Zone by Head Office when no such matter was taken up with the Head Office. Further, the said lawyer being in Panel of Mumbai South Zone and all interactions were with New Delhi, the lawyer and HO being not involved in this process, those factually incorrect pleadings in the delay condonation petition had even put the HO in bad light. These kind of casual approach in not initiating the legal process in time compounded by the lackadaisical manner in which pleadings are taken is unacceptable as such kind of actions may cause reputational loss to the bank besides other issues 4, __ Having stated as above, Legal Department New Delhi is advised to look into the matter and apprise us on the following: a) When certified copy of order dated 09.11.2020 was made available to the Zone on 05.12.2020, when the instructions were given to the advocate to file appeal? b) When the advocate did not respond, what steps were taken by the Zone to ensure filing of appeal without delay? ©) When the Supreme Court had extended the period of limitation till 28.02.2022, why the benefit of same was not taken, which would have considerably reduced the delay period technically and would not have issued such orders by High Court? 4) Who had approved the draft of delay condonation Petition and the signatory to the same? e) What is the present status of recovery proceedings in the account and how much recovery is made? £) Whether Bank of Baroda has initiated separate action? g) Was there any time lost in corresponding with Bank of Baroda for filing the appeal and if yes, why such pleading was not taken for delay condonation? 5. Please provide immediate clarification/reply on the above points, 6. The names and PF number of officers who were handling this at Delhi Legal Department and also the names of Head of Legal Departments during the period 09.11.2020 till the date of filing of appeal be provided to us for necessary action. TR Ud TUR, PR er IS or sifafere ye ‘aat fa44rT / Recovery Department, ag feet staal / New Delhi Zone, / Phone : 011-28844099 / Email : NewDelhi ARD@bankofindia.co.in