The value of all debts and claims against the company in liquidation shall be estimated according to the value thereof at the date of the order of the winding up of the company.

1. - The appellant-RIICO albeit a secured creditor has chosen to stay within winding up of M/s. Lath Steels Pvt. Ltd. (now in liquidation). The winding up order was passed by the Company Court on 17.10.2003 and its assets directed to be handed over to the Official Liquidator (hereinafter "OL"). They were then auctioned by the OL on 26.08.2008 for an amount of Rs.459.81/- lacs. The Company Court approved/sanctioned the highest bid aforesaid on 07.07.2010. The property in issue has since been conveyed to the buyer.

2. The official liquidator on receipt of the auction amount, invited claims from the secured creditors vide letter dated 22.02.2011. The appellant-RIICO was the only first charge holder and submitted its claim before the O.L. on 08.03.2011 for a sum of Rs.14,76,38,557/- constituted of (i) Rs.14,07,04,854/- as term loan outstanding along with contracted interest as on 15.01.2011 (ii) Rs.34,92,363/- as interest on advance against subsidy as on 28.02.2011 (iii) Rs.33,18,750/- as State capital investment subsidy as on 28.2.2011 and (iv) Rs.1,22,590/- as expenses as on 07.02.2011, aggregating to Rs.14,76,38,557/-. By the OL's determination dated 30.11.2012, of which the appellant-RIICO is aggrieved, its claim only to an extent of Rs.3,84,41,673/- was allowed while that of remainder Rs.10,91,96,884/- rejected. Hence this appeal.

3. Mr. Anurag Sharma, AAG appearing for the appellant-RIICO has submitted that the rejection of the RIICO's claim for an amount of Rs.10,91,96,884/- is unreasoned, perverse as RIICO ought to have been entitled to disbursement of the entire amount of Rs.459.81/- lacs and accrued interest thereon as it was the only first charge holder. It has been further submitted that the determination dated 30.11.2012 mechanically only records that the said amount was not payable in view of it not being "lodged in accordance with law" and is opaque and unsustainable. It has been submitted that in the circumstances, the OL be directed to pay the entire amount of Rs.459.81/- lacs received from the sale of the fixed assets of the Company in liquidation along with interest accrued since its receipt to RIICO.

4. Per contra, Mr. K.J. Mehta, appearing for the respondent-O.L. has submitted that the appeal filed by the appellant-RIICO before this Court is without any legal foundation as it does not advert to any provision of law under which the appellant-RIICO was entitled to a sum more than Rs.3,84,41,673/- as calculated by the OL in accordance with the Rule 154 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 (hereinafter "the Rules of 1959"). Nor in fact does the claim seek to rely upon any other specific provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter "the Act of 1956") and the Rules of 1959 whereunder it can be established that the claim based on contracted interest upto the date of the claim, even subsequent to the winding order can be made or paid. It has been submitted that under Rule 154 of the Rules of 1959, no creditor whether secured or unsecured, can claim that value of its debt be determined beyond the date of the winding up order. M/s. Lath Steels Pvt. Ltd was wound up vide order dated 17.10.2003, passed by this Court. In terms of Rule 154 of the Rules of 1959, RIICO's claim for its outstanding debt can be valued only upto 17.10.2003 and not thereafter. And it has been so determined as per the calculation sheet filed with the reply to the appeal at Rs.3,84,41,673/- only under various heads. The value of RIICO's debt being so determined out of the RIICO's claim of Rs.14,76,38,557/-, the remainder claim of Rs.10,91,96,884/- was rejected.

5. Counsel has further submitted that interest payable subsequent to the winding up order in respect of a value of debt determined under Rules 154 of the Rules of 1959 is only payable under Rule 179 of the Rule of 1959 upto a maximum of 4% per annum only subject to any surplus left with the O.L. after discharging all debts determined under Rule 154 of the Rules of 1959. It has been