Raymond office row: Anant Singhania moves session court against magisterial order

Anant Singhania, son of Ajaypath Singhania, has approached the sessions court, challenging the process issued by a magistrate court on the complaint of Raymond Limited for not vacating the office premises at New Hind House
HT Image
HT Image
Updated on Apr 21, 2021 12:51 AM IST
Copy Link
By, Mumbai

Anant Singhania, son of Ajaypath Singhania, has approached the sessions court, challenging the process issued by a magistrate court on the complaint of Raymond Limited for not vacating the office premises at New Hind House.

The dispute over the possession of some part of the first floor of the building by Anant and his brother Akshaypath arose in September 2016, when the brothers were restrained by the security guard of the company from entering the premises.

The company has also filed a suit before the small causes court asking the brothers to vacate the premises.

While the suit is still pending, the company on September 19, 2019, filed a private complaint before the metropolitan magistrate court, Ballard Estate, seeking criminal action against the two under section 452 of the Companies Act for wrongfully withholding the property of the company.

In the complaint, the company claimed that, on September 20, 2016, the brothers were restrained by the officers of the company due to security reasons and they were asked to wait outside the premises for some time.

The company alleged that the brother, however, approached the police and it was only after the intervention of the officials of the company the matter was resolved.

The company claimed that by a letter dated September 21, 2016, the company revoked, cancelled and withdrew the license and possession granted to the brothers to use the premises and asked them to vacate the premises.

On the complaint of the company, the court had directed the MRA Marg police to investigate the matter and submit the report.

Anant in his revision application before the session’s court said that they learnt about the criminal complaint only on March 4, 2020, when they received a letter from the MRA Marg police station. He claimed that when his lawyers contacted the officers on March 6, 2020, they were informed that the report on the investigation was already submitted.

The report by the police, as per the reply of the company to Anant’s petition, was submitted on March 13, last year.

However, due to the pandemic, the case was not heard until late 2020. The magistrate court relying on the report of the police and the contention of the company issued process to initiate proceedings against Anant and Akshaypath on January 14.

Anant has challenged the summons before the sessions court on March 11 claiming, the court failed to consider that they were not heard by the officer who investigated the case.

Anant has claimed that his father used the premises from 1960 onwards till his demise till 1992 and after him, his wife – mother of Anant Veenadevi occupied the premises till date. He further claimed that around 1986, his brother Akshaypat joined the family business and in 1994 he was appointed as one of the directors of the company. Later in 1995, Anant joined the business and was appointed director in August 2000.

Anant claimed that he along with his brother Akshaypat resigned from the directorship of the company in 2008, under an arrangement that arrived between his uncle Vijaypat Singhania and his son Gautam Singhania. They claimed that in return it was agreed that they would receive some shares of the company and also other benefits which included the permanent license and possession and use of the premises by Anant and Akshaypat for their independent business.

Anant claimed, that suddenly on September 20, 2016, they were restrained the brothers from using the said premises. They called the police for restraining them but the matter was settled and they did not press for the criminal charges against the directors of the company including Gautam.

Anant claimed that they were shocked when they first came to know about the suit filed by the company in December 2016 before the small causes court asking brothers to vacate the premises and subsequently a criminal complaint against them in 2019.

It is claimed in the revision petition, that the magistrate failed to see on record that the investigating officer did not grant time to them to come and record any statement and also failed to consider records of the proceedings of the small causes court.

The company recently submitted a reply to Anant petition. The company has claimed that ‘neither the accused have provided any document showing their alleged right to occupy the premises of the Company nor vacated the premises owned by the company.’

The company claimed, “The accused persons were permitted to use the premises in question only on a gratuitous basis and there was no agreement of any kind whatsoever authorising the accused persons to remain in possession of the premises. It is impermissible for the accused to wrongfully withheld the property of the company.”

“The accused persons cannot be permitted access and movement in the office of the complainant-company as there is serious threat and apprehension regarding the security and confidentiality of the complainant company’s business, books and documents. Thus, by continuing to illegally occupy the premises belonging to the complainant-company, the accused persons have made themselves liable to be convicted under section 452 of the Companies Act, 2013,” reads the reply submitted by the company to Anant’s petition.


    Charul Shah is senior reporter covering the legal beat for Hindustan Times. She has spent over a decade in the industry covering criminal investigations and judiciary from Mumbai, Ahmedabad and Bengaluru.

Close Story

Less time to read?

Try Quickreads

  • On Monday, 369 new Covid cases were detected in the state and five deaths. In Pune district, 336 new Covid cases were reported. (HT FILE PHOTO)

    PMC data shows most Covid hospitalisations in 40+ age group

    Most Covid-19 patients who are admitted to hospitals in Pune Municipal Corporation limits are above the age of 40 years and with co-morbidities, said officials. Out of 2,064 active patients in PMC limits, 74 patients are between the age group of zero to 10 years of age. And 228 patients are from the age group of 11 to 20 years of age. 11 patients who have received at least a dose of the vaccine.

  • For representation only (HT File Photo)

    It rained in Lucknow…a little, but more in the pipeline, assures Met office

    After the brief pre-monsoon showers that the state capital experienced on Monday, Lucknow Meteorological office director JP Gupta said, “Lucknow may experience a few more spells of pre-monsoon rain before the actual monsoon arrives in the central parts of Uttar Pradesh.” The IMD monsoon bulletin said that conditions were favourable for the further advance of the Southwest Monsoon into some more parts of Uttar Pradesh.

  • The stretch at Khadki Cantonment area where the BRTS is proposed (HT PHOTO)

    PMC to start work on BRTS route on old Pune-Mumbai highway

    The Pune Municipal Corporation has proposed work on yet another BRTS (Bus Rapid Transit Route) corridor on the old Pune-Mumbai highway from Khadki Cantonment to College of Engineering chowk. Work on the project will start soon, said officials. The civic body plans to spend Rs77 crore for the 2.2 km BRTS stretch and has floated tenders for the same. India's first pilot BRTS project was planned in Pune in the year 2006.

  • For representation only (HT FIle Photo)

    Dip in UP Covid cases but 450 still catch virus

    Uttar Pradesh recorded a slight fall in new daily Covid-19 cases as 450 more people tested positive on Monday, as against the 574 who had tested positive a day before. The test positivity rate in 24 hours in UP is 0.6%. Lucknow reported 138 new cases, Ghaziabad 49 76, Gautam Buddh Nagar, Gorakhpur 20, Lakhimpur-Khiri 37, the state health department data read. Lucknow was the only district to have reported new cases in three figures.

  • Doctors have advised to avoid delay in treatment if one has a history of fever, headache, rashes, muscle and joint pain, vomiting and diarrhoea, as malaria and Covid have similar symptoms. (REPRESENTATIVE PHOTO)

    Punekars complain of mosquito menace

    Residents of peth areas and Kondhwa have complained on the Pune Municipal Corporation's official Twitter handle about mosquito menace in their localities. Mohit Limaye tweeted on the PMC's official handle about the problem of mosquitos in his locality in Narayan peth. Twitter user Kartik replied to that tweet saying “The mosquito issue is being faced in a lot of areas all over Pune – even in Kondhwa.”

Story Saved
Saved Articles
My Reads
Sign out
New Delhi 0C
Monday, June 27, 2022