The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted a last opportunity to petitioner Rajpal Naurang Yadav to deposit at least ₹2 crore in connection with the dispute involving M/s Murli Projects Pvt. Ltd.
On September 8 order the special leave petitions were taken on board and notice was issued conditionally, subject to the petitioners depositing ₹5 crore with the Registry.
During the hearing, the Court was informed that the ₹5 crore condition had not been complied with. Counsel appearing for the actor sought two weeks’ time, submitting that the petitioner intended to arrange the money but was presently facing financial difficulties and had property which could be sold.
The petitioner’s counsel told the Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana that the actor had already paid approximately ₹4.16 crore against the principal amount claimed. According to the submission, ₹1.91 crore had been paid before the High Court proceedings and a further ₹2.25 crore during the pendency of the matter before the High Court. The counsel submitted that the original settlement dated April 21, 2013 recorded an amount of around ₹10 crore as due, while the respondents claimed that a further amount was payable with interest.
Seeking a final opportunity, counsel proposed that Yadav be allowed two weeks to come before the Court with a concrete proposal and deposit at least ₹2 crore.
The respondents opposed granting further indulgence, questioning the petitioner’s past conduct and stressing that the Court wanted to see the actual money deposited.
The Bench observed that although the petitioner’s past conduct did not inspire confidence, it was granting him one last opportunity. It remarked:
“
“Though the past conduct of the petitioner does not inspire confidence, however, it will remain true and making it for sure at the last opportunity, for about two weeks’ time is granted to the petitioner, to honour the statement.”
The Court ultimately directed the petitioner to deposit not less than ₹2 crore, with the matter to be taken up on October 5. The Court further directed that Yadav should be personally present with the demand draft and that the complainant should also be present.The exemption earlier granted to the petitioner from surrendering was directed to continue, subject to the conditions imposed by the Court. The petitioner was also directed to deposit his passport.