IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
K.A. Puj, J.
Agarwal Mittal Concast Pvt. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Official Liquidator of Jalan Forgings Ltd. (In Liquidation) And Others - Respondents
Misc. Civil Application No 58 of 2009 in O.L.R. No. 37 of 2008 in C.P. No. 1 of 2003.
Decided On : 11-01-2010
Companies Act, 1956 - Section 446(2) - Applicant has taken out this judges summons seeking clarification/modification in the order - Applicant has also prayed for the declaration that the applicant is not liable to pay the outstanding electricity dues of the company in liquidation, for the pre-liquidation period in respect of composite lot, which included land, made by this court read with order passed by this court in Company Application applicant has further prayed for a direction to respondents to take all necessary steps to provide fresh electricity connection in respect of the land in question without insisting to pay the outstanding electricity dues of the pre-liquidation period of the company in liquidation. The applicant has further prayed for direction to the respondents to provide temporary electricity connection at land described hereinabove, without insisting to pay the outstanding electricity dues of the pre-liquidation period of the company in liquidation - Held, Condition of supply framed by board in exercise of its power under section 49 of the Act are statutory and clause 2(j) thereof which requires a prospective consumer to deposit the arrears of electricity dues outstanding against the former consumer falls within the ambit and scope of section 49(1). The court further held that the ratio of the Supreme Court judgment in case, cannot be applied to the cases before the Division Bench because clause 2(j) of the conditions of supply framed by the Board which is statutory in character contains a specific provision for payment of the arrears of the electricity dues as a condition precedent for restoration of the connection or grant of fresh connection, court has also rejected the petitioner's challenge to clause 2(j) of conditions of supply on the ground of violation of article 19 of the Constitution as there was no unreasonable restriction on their right to carry on trade or business - Application rejected.
JUDGMENT :
K.A. Puj, J.
The applicant has taken out this judges summons seeking clarification/modification in the order dated March 18, 2008, read with order dated November 21, 2008, passed in Official Liquidator Report No. 37 of 2008 and Company Application No. 443 of 2008. The applicant has also prayed for the declaration that the applicant is not liable to pay the outstanding electricity dues of the company in liquidation, for the pre-liquidation period in respect of composite lot, which included land bearing Plot No. 2348 of Survey/Block No. 219/paiki-3 admeasuring 28,328 sq. meters situated at Champaner Road, Moje Chandrapiir, Taluka Halol and land bearing Plot No. 2348 bearing Survey/Block Nos. 110/1/1118 and 110/ 1119 admeasuring about 32136.90 sq. meters, situated at Champaner Road, Moje Khinjarva, Taluka Savali, District Vadodara admeasuring in aggregate 60,464.90 sq. meters apropos to the order dated March 18, 2008, made by this court in O. L. R. No. 37 of 2008 read with order dated November 21, 2008, passed by this court in Company Application No. 443 of 2008. The applicant has further prayed for a direction to the respondents to take all necessary steps to provide fresh electricity connection in respect of the land in question without insisting to pay the outstanding electricity dues of the pre-liquidation period of the company in liquidation. The applicant has further prayed for direction to the respondents to provide temporary electricity connection at the site of M/s. Jalan Forgings Ltd. (in liquidation), at the land described hereinabove, without insisting to pay the outstanding electricity dues of the pre-liquidation period of the company in liquidation.
2. An affidavit in support of judges summons is filed by one Mr. Suresh Agarwal, director and authorised officer of the applicant. An affidavit in reply is filed on behalf of respondents Nos. 2 and 3 by the executive engineer, Madhya Gujarat Vij Co. Ltd. Affidavit in rejoinder is filed on behalf of the applicant. Affidavit in surrejoinder is filed on behalf of respondents Nos. 2 and 3 by the executive engineer of Madhya Gujarat Vij Co. Ltd.
3. Heard Mr. N.K. Pahwa, the learned advocate appearing for the applicant, Mr. J.S. Yadav, the learned advocate appearing for the official liquidator and Mr. M.D. Pandya, learned senior counsel appearing with Ms. Maya Desai for respondents Nos. 2 and 3.
4. It is the case of the applicant that M/s. Jalan Forgings Ltd., came to be wound up by this court vide its order dated December 1, 2005, passed in Company Petition No. 325 of 1999. This court has confirmed the terms and conditions of sale of the assets of the company in liquidation and directed the official liquidator to invite bids for sale of the properties of the company in liquidation. Pursuant to the said order, the official liquidator published public advertisements in the local dailies and offers received by the official liquidator were placed before the sale committee for consideration. After the sale committee considered the offers, the official liquidator filed his Report No. 37 of 2008 before the court for confirmation of sale. This court directed the official liquidator to intimate all the bidders for inter se bidding before this court and after inter se bidding took place before this court, the offer of M/s. Ajar Enterprises came to be accepted at Rs.4.25 crores in respect of the composite lot, which included the land in question. By order dated March 18, 2008, passed by this court in O. L. R. No. 37 of 2008, this court has confirmed the sale on the terms and conditions approved by this court in favour of M/s. Ajar Enterprises. As per the terms and conditions of the order confirming the sale in favour of M/s. Ajar Enterprises P. Ltd., the said party was permitted to appoint one nominee and accordingly the said party has appointed the present applicant as its nominee. The applicant has paid the full consideration pursuant to the order dated March 18, 2008. After mak
Brihan Maharashtra Sugar Syndicate Ltd. v. Janardan Ram chandra Kulkarni
Chief Inspector of Mines v. Karam Chand Thapar
Hasan Nurani Malak v. S.M. Ismail, Assistant Charity Com missioner, Nagpur
Jayantilal Amratlal v. Union of India
K. G. Purushothaman v. Kerala State Electricity Board
K.G. Purushothaman v. Kerala State Electricity Board
K.R. Suraj v. Secretary, Kerala State Electricity Board
Neel alias Niranjan Majumdar v. State of West Bengal
Official Liquidator, Himalaya Tools (India) P. Ltd. v. Gujarat State Finance Corporation
Ram Parshad v. State of Punjab
Seena B. Kumar v. Assistant Executive Engineer, Electrical Major Section, Mavelikkara
State of Punjab v. Mohar Singh Pratap Singh
Torrent Power AEC Ltd. v. Shreeji (Rakhial) Commercial Co-operative Housing Society Ltd.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.