SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(Guj) 464

Gujarat High Court
Judgename :K.A.Puj
O.L.OF AHMEDABAD MFG.and CALICOPRINTING MILLS CO.LTD. - Appellant
Versus
MANAGER, IDBI - Respondent
OFFICIAL LIQUDATOR REPORT 61 of 2005
Decided On : 07/18/2005

Advocates Appeared: A.C.GANDHI, D.S.VASAVADA SHUKLA, G.N.SHAH, K.R.MODI, K.S.Nanavati, PAVAN S.GODIAWALA, RAJESH P.MANKAD, SANDEEP SINGHI, SHAKTISINH GOHIL

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 12 – Companies Act – Section 617 – Official Liquidator – Auction – Seeking confirmation of sale of 2,30,327 Sq. Meters of free hold land and all other assets of the Company situated at Anik Road, Chembur, Mumbai in favour of M/s. Rockline Construction Company of RNA House for a consideration of Rs. 120. 50 Crores on the terms and conditions of the Tender Form produced at Annexure K to the report and/or on such further terms and conditions as this Court may deem just and proper or otherwise – Whether late entry charges collected by the Official liquidator from the late entrants as a condition precedent for taking part in the inter-se bidding either before the sale Committee or before this Court are non-refundable – Held, It appears to the Court that the Official Liquidator as well as the Security personnels deployed by him have totally failed to protect and safeguard the properties of the Company in liquidation – The Court is of the view that Official Liquidator is not either competent to take care of the properties of the company in liquidation or he had no desire to take any effective steps or his office might be involved in allowing such thefts, pilferages or similar such things – The Court is at pains to point out that the present one is not the solitary case – In many of the Companies in liquidation, similar such things are happening day in and day out – Role of office of the Official Liquidator in the State is required to be closely watched and scrutinized by the Central Government, ministry of Law and Company Affairs and if necessary, this task should be assigned to the Investigating Agency like CBI and based on its finding, appropriate corrective remedial and punitive actions are required to be taken forthwith – Report disposed of. (Paras 46 and 47)

K. A. PUJ, J.

( 1 ) THE Official Liquidator has filed this report on 04. 05. 2005 seeking, inter alia, confirmation of sale of 2,30,327 Sq. Meters of free hold land or thereabout, bearing City Survey No. 382, 382/1 to 382/66 and all other assets of the Company situated at Anik Road, Chembur, Mumbai in favour of M/s. Rockline Construction Company of RNA House, Level III, 50 Veer Nariman Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 023, for a consideration of Rs. 120. 50 Crores on the terms and conditions of the Tender Form produced at Annexure K to the report and/or on such further terms and conditions as this Court may deem just and proper or otherwise.

( 2 ) THE Official Liquidator has also prayed for other directions with regard to ratification of action taken by the Sale Committee in not holding auction for residential plot situated at Diamond Garden, Chembur, Mumbai and ratification of the action taken by the Sale Committee in making ad hoc payment of Rs. 4,68,778/- to M/s. MITCON consultancy Services Ltd. , against its bill for rs. 10,33,187/- for Valuation and title investigation report produced at Annexure G to the report and also with regard to seeking permission to make the payment of balance amount of rs. 5,64,409/- to the said party, also with regard to the payment of Rs. 73. 504/- to M/s. Navnitlal and Co. , being charges for advertisement expenses as well as ratification of action taken by the Official Liquidator in making the payment of Rs. 39,000/- to SGreen House Restaurant and Bar, ville Parle, Mumbai for hiring venue for auction and other incidental expenses for conducting the auction at Mumbai on 09. 04. 2005 and also with regard to making payment of Rs. 7,000/- to Mr. P. C. Kavina, advocate against his bill dated 08. 04. 2005 and also with regard to ratification of action taken by him in making payment of Rs. 25,000/- to Shri S. N. Rastogi, Valuer.

( 3 ) THE main prayer in this report is with regard to confirmation of sale or otherwise in favour of M/s. Rockline construction Company. The Official Liquidator has submitted in his report that on 09. 04. 2005, the offers received by the official Liquidator pursuant to the advertisement issued, were placed before the Sale Committee at the venue of auction in Mumbai. The Official Liquidator has informed the members of the Sale Committee that in all 123 tender forms have been sold and five offers were received for Lot NO. III i. e. Composite offer. He has further informed that because of the stay granted by the Bombay High Court in Notice of motion No. 3071 of 1990 in Suit No. 329 of 1990, the auction for proposed sale of Lot No. II should not be proceeded with. The bidders for Lot No. II were allowed to participate in the auction for Lot No. I. Similarly, the bidders for Lot no. III were also allowed to participate for Lot No. I. Thereafter, the auction for Lot No. I started amongst the 9 bidders. It was announced by the Official Liquidator that lowest offer received for Lot No. I is Rs. 85 Crores from m/s. Rockline Construction Company, Mumbai and highest offer of Rs. 91,66,650/- was received for Lot No. I from Hindustan petroleum Corporation Limited. After this announcement, the bidding process was started and at the conclusion of the meeting, the highest offer was of Rs. 120. 50 Crores from M/s. Rockline Construction Company, Mumbai and with that the auction proceedings were concluded. The Sale Committee has taken the decision that the offer of Rs. 120. 50 Crores from m/s. Rockline Construction Company, Mumbai should be placed before this Court for confirmation of sale or otherwise. The sale Committee has also returned the Drafts of EMD to unsuccessful bidders and the draft of EMD of Rs. 5 Crores of the successful bidder i. e. M/s. Rockline Construction company, Mumbai was retained by the Official Liquidator.

( 4 ) THIS Court has issued notice on 13. 05. 2005. Mr. G. N. Shah, learned advocate appearing on Caveat on behalf of HPCL waived service of notice. The Official Liquidator wa














































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top