9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Application seeking quashing of notice and ratification of property transaction. 2. Interim relief granted by the Court. 3. Conditions laid down by the Court. 4. Settlement between parties and creditors. 5. Approval of property transaction under Section 536(2) of the Companies Act. 6. Approval of bills and expenses incurred. 7. Disposal of the application based on settlement. Analysis: 1. The application filed sought the quashing of a notice and ratification of a property transaction. The applicant requested direction to quash a notice issued by the Official Liquidator (O.L.) for taking over assets at a specific location. Additionally, the applicant sought approval and transfer of properties from another entity in liquidation. An interim relief was granted by the Court, allowing the applicant to retain possession of the premises under certain conditions. 2. The Court imposed conditions, including the filing of undertakings, deposit of a percentage of property value, and submission of production and financial details. The applicant complied with these conditions by depositing a specified amount with the O.L. The Court further required the applicant to hand over possession if the adjudication went against them. 3. A settlement was reached between the parties and creditors, leading to the withdrawal of winding-up petitions and settlement of dues. The petitioning creditors confirmed the settlement and their intention to withdraw petitions. The applicant settled with statutory and secured creditors, resolving most outstanding claims. 4. Considering the settlement and the settled claims, the Court did not adjudicate the issues on merits but granted the relief sought in the application. The Court approved the property transaction under Section 536(2) of the Companies Act due to the settlement and development between the parties. 5. The Court approved the bills of the Chartered Accountant and Valuer, slightly reducing the amounts. The O.L. was directed to reimburse expenses and make payments from the deposited amount. The O.L. was instructed to refund the balance to the applicant promptly. 6. The Court disposed of the application based on the settlement, emphasizing that the order was without prejudice to the rights of other creditors who were not part of the settlement. Parties were given the option to approach the Court if they felt affected by the order. This comprehensive analysis covers the issues raised in the judgment, detailing the application, interim relief, settlement, approval of property transaction, approval of bills, and the final disposal of the application based on the settlement reached between the parties and creditors.
|
