2017 (7) TMI 1426 - HC - Companies Law

Taking over the actual physical possession of the mortgaged property as also the hypothecated stocks and goods lying in the shop by Possession Notices - seeking permission of this Court to continue with the Complaint under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the Respondent and its directors pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate - HELD THAT - The Provisional Liquidator in the present case was appointed on 28.02.2013 and the complaint was filed after the appointment of the Provisional Liquidator. Mr.Mayank Goel, learned counsel for the OL submits that without considering any aspect of the matter either in fact or in law, he has no objection in case the proceedings are continued before the learned MM subject to the condition that the OL who has taken over the assets and control of the company pursuant to the orders passed by this Court on 28.02.2013 be exempted from appearance and further no punitive order against the company or the OL be executed without the prior permission of this Court. Subject to the above, the applicant is permitted to proceed with the complaints bearing No. 2990/1/15 and 261/1/16. The application stands disposed of.

Summary

Issues:
1. Application for sale of hypothecated goods under SARFAESI Act, 2002.
2. Permission to release funds for payment to security agencies.
3. Application for de-sealing of rented premises.
4. Permission to continue with complaint cases under Negotiable Instruments Act.

Analysis:

1. Application for sale of hypothecated goods under SARFAESI Act, 2002:
The State Bank of India filed an application seeking permission to sell hypothecated goods and stocks under the SARFAESI Act, 2002. The bank had taken physical possession of the mortgaged property and stocks through Possession Notices. Despite seeking permission from the Official Liquidator (OL) for the sale, no response was received. The OL eventually had no objection to the sale, and the court allowed the application. The sale proceeds were directed to be deposited with the OL in the company's account.

2. Permission to release funds for payment to security agencies:
The OL requested permission to release funds to security agencies for services provided at various premises of the company in liquidation. The court allowed the release of funds to the security agencies against their outstanding bills from the Common Pool Fund. The OL was also permitted to make further payments after due verification of bills, even allowing for a loan if necessary, with reimbursement from secured creditors.

3. Application for de-sealing of rented premises:
An application was made for the de-sealing of a rented premises given to the company in liquidation. The landlord had deposited a security deposit with the OL, and joint inventory had been prepared. The court directed the necessary actions for shifting goods and handing over possession to the landlord, thereby disposing of the application.

4. Permission to continue with complaint cases under Negotiable Instruments Act:
Applications were filed seeking permission to continue with complaint cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act against the company in liquidation and its directors. The OL did not object to the proceedings continuing before the Metropolitan Magistrate, subject to certain conditions. The court permitted the applicant to proceed with the complaints, with the condition that the OL be exempted from appearance and no punitive order be executed against the company or OL without prior permission from the court.

These applications addressed various aspects of the company in liquidation, including the sale of assets, release of funds for essential services, de-sealing of premises, and continuation of legal proceedings, ensuring proper management and resolution of the company's affairs under the oversight of the court.