9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Determination of the capitalised value of land belonging to a company in liquidation. 2. Dispute over possession and transfer of land between the applicant and the Official Liquidator. 3. Consideration of valuation reports and offers for the land. Issue 1: Determination of Capitalised Value The applicant sought court orders to fix the capitalised value of land leased from a company in liquidation. The land was initially leased for 99 years, with subsequent modifications. The Official Liquidator objected, emphasizing the need to recover money for creditors and contributories. The applicant proposed paying the estimated market value of the land to acquire it. Issue 2: Dispute Over Possession and Transfer The Official Liquidator filed an application to take possession of the land due to non-payment of rents by the applicant. A court receiver was appointed by the Bombay High Court over the properties, leading to a legal tussle. The court allowed the Official Liquidator to involve the court receiver in the proceedings. The Debts Recovery Tribunal later discharged the court receiver, prompting the applicant to seek transfer of the land in its favor. Issue 3: Valuation Reports and Offers Both the SBI and the Official Liquidator valued the land at around Rs. 4 crores. The applicant, to avoid prolonged litigation, offered to pay the estimated market value as per the valuation report by J.K. Murty & Co. The court directed the SBI to reassess the market value and proceed with auction proceedings, indicating that the property should be sold openly rather than directly to the applicant. In conclusion, the court decided that the applicant, as a lessee, did not hold a preferential right to purchase the land. It ordered the property to be sold through an auction, allowing the applicant to participate. The application was disposed of with these directions, emphasizing the need for a fair and transparent process in dealing with the land in question.
|
