THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN in C.P. No. 25 of 2013

ORDER:

Heard Sri V. Aneesh, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri J. Srinadh Reddy, learned counsel for Official Liquidator.

2. This Company Application is filed under Rule 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, read with Order IX Rule 13 of the Code Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking a direction to the Official Liquidator to handover physical possession of Flat No.301, Raasi Hills View, Manor, 11-4-646/B, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the subject property’) to the petitioner for enabling it to enforce the same under the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, ‘SARFAESI Act’).

3. According to the petitioner, the subject property belongs to Smt. P. Parvathi, W/o P. Subba Raju. She has purchased the subject property under a registered Sale Deed bearing document No.134 of 1995 dated 09.01.1995. She was the Director of respondent No.1 Company. Therefore, respondent No.1 Company used the subject property for the purpose of its Registered Office.

4. It is further contended by the petitioner that respondent No.1 Company has availed financial assistance from State Bank of India, Nalgonda Branch, and State Bank of Patiala, Mid-Corporate Branch. Thereupon, vide Memorandum of Entry dated 25.01.2012, the said Mrs. Parvathi and other Directors of respondent No.1 Company mortgaged their respective properties including the subject property by way of depositing the same with the lead banker, SBI. However, respondent No.1 Company failed to repay the dues to the said banks. Therefore, respondent No.3 initiated winding up proceedings against respondent No.1, before the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh by way of filing C.P.No.25 of 2013. Thereupon, vide order dated 03.08.2015 in C.P.No.25 of 2013, the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh passed winding up orders in respect of respondent No.1 Company.

Pursuant to the winding up order dated 03.08.2015, respondent No.2 has taken possession of assets and liabilities of respondent No.1 Company.

5. Before passing of the said winding up order, State Bank of India has executed Assignment Agreement dated 30.06.2014 in favour of the petitioner. Likewise, State Bank of Patiala has executed another Assignment Agreement dated

27.06.2014 in favour of the petitioner.

6. Pursuant to the said Assignment Agreements, the petitioner herein initiated proceedings against respondent No.1 Company under the provisions of the SARFAESI ACT to recover the loan extended to it. The petitioner has also tried to take possession of the subject property as per the procedure laid down under the SARFAESI Act. Thus, respondent No.2 resisted the petitioner in taking possession of the subject property contending that the subject property belongs to respondent No.1 Company. Therefore, the petitioner has filed an application vide Crl.M.P.No.1303 of 2017, under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, to appoint Commissioner to take physical possession of the secured assets including the subject property. Thereupon, vide order dated 01.05.2017 in Crl.M.P.No.1303 of 2017, the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, appointed an Advocate Commissioner to take physical possession of the subject property. The same was extended vide order dated 07.07.2017.

7. It is also contended by the petitioner that it has addressed a letter dated 13.09.2017 to respondent No.2 with a request to depute an Authorized Officer at the time of taking possession to unseal the subject property so as to enable the Advocate Commissioner to take possession of the same. Even then, respondent No.2 did not permit the Advocate Commissioner to take possession of the subject property by unsealing the same. Therefore, the petitioner has filed the present Company Application.

8. In paragraph 3 of the counter, respondent No.2 has specifically contended that the Official Liquidator submitted a report d