HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

D.B. Special Appeal (Civil) No. 3/2020

M/s Medhavni Industries, Through Its Proprietor Shri Parakram

Singh Dangi S/o Shri Abhay Singh Dangi, Aged About 89 Years,

R/o Azad Chowk, Bhilwara.

----Appellant

Versus

The Official Liquidator Of M/s Mewar Textiles Mills Limited,

Bhilwara

----Respondent

For Appellant

:

Mr. Manoj Bhandari, Sr. Advocate assisted

by Mr. Aniket Tater

For Respondent

:

Mr. Rakesh Arora

Mr. Hardik Gautam

Present in person

:

Mr. D.K. Meena–Official Liquidator

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

Judgment

(Per Hon’ble Vijay Bishnoi, J.) :

28/07/2022

This special appeal has been filed by the appellant-firm being

aggrieved with the order dated 24.01.2020 passed by the learned

Single Judge of this Court, whereby S.B. Company Application

No.5/2019 filed by the appellant-firm under Rule 9 of the

Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the

Rules of 1959’) read with Section 151 CPC was disposed of with a

direction to the respondent-Official Liquidator to pay 4% interest,

on agreed claim, to the appellant-firm from the date of winding up

i.e. 23.02.2010 till the date of declaration of dividend i.e.

08.04.2019 in accordance with the Rule 179 of the Rules 1959.

(2 of 4)

[SAC-3/2020]

Brief facts of the case are that the appellant-firm, which is an

unsecured creditor, moved above referred application under Rule 9

of the Rules of 1959 read with Section 151 CPC with a prayer to

direct the respondent-Official Liquidator to release the claim of

interest of the appellant-firm on the amount remitted to it after

the order of winding up of the company was passed by this Court.

The said application came to be disposed of by the learned Single

Judge vide order dated 24.01.2020 while observing that the

appellant-firm being unsecured creditor is entitled for 4% interest

per annum and directed the respondent-Official Liquidator to pay

interest at the rate of 4% to the appellant-firm from the date of

winding up i.e. 23.02.2010 till the date of declaration of dividend

i.e. 08.04.2019. The said direction was issued by the learned

Single Judge after taking into consideration the Rule 179 of the

Rules of 1959.

After attempting to argue the matter for quite some time,

learned counsel for the appellant-firm has failed to convince this

Court that the appellant-firm is entitled for the interest at an

increased rate than the rate of 4% per annum, however, it is

argued that the learned Single Judge has erred in directing the

respondent-Official Liquidator to pay the interest till the date of

declaration of dividend i.e. 08.04.2019.

Learned counsel for the appellant-firm has submitted that

the respondent-Official Liquidator is bound to pay the interest to

the appellant-firm along with the agreed claim amount, however,

as the respondent-Liquidator has failed to pay the same, the

learned Single Judge ought to have directed the

respondent-Official Liquidator to pay the interest up to

(3 of 4)

[SAC-3/2020]

24.01.2020, the date when the application under Rule 9 of the

Rules of 1959 read with Section 151 CPC preferred by the

appellant-firm was disposed of by it.

Learned counsel for the appellant-firm has submitted that

the appellant-firm is deprived of interest from 08.04.2019 to

24.01.2020 only on account of inaction on the part of the

respondent-Official Liquidator.

Opposing claim of the appellant-firm, the respondent-Official

Liquidator Mr. D.K. Meena, present in person, has argued that he

was not in a position to release a single penny without the order

of the Court and as soon as the Court ordered for paying amount

of interest vide order dated 24.01.2020, the same was paid in

February 2020 itself. It is further argued that as a matter of fact,

the respondent-Official Liquidator cannot pay interest amount

with