Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1991 (8) TMI 267

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt petition are as under : Hindustan Forest Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. (In Liquidation) (hereinafter referred to as "the company") filed an application numbered as C. A. No. 169 of 1974, under section 522 of the Companies Act for winding up of the company under the supervision of this court. The aforesaid application was allowed by this court on February 27, 1975, and Shri B. K. Kapoor, ex-managing director of the company, was appointed as liquidator of the company for winding up of the company under the supervision of the court. On June 17, 1975, notices under rule 148 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules"), were issued to the creditors for filing their claims within the prescribed period. The petitioners in t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... es, and, therefore, has no right to continue or officiate as the liquidator and, therefore, sought the removal of Sh. B. K. Kapoor as liquidator of the company and prayed that in his place an official liquidator be appointed for the winding up of the company subject to the supervision of the court. Under rule 163, the liquidator after such investigation as he thinks necessary, is required either to admit or reject the proof submitted by the creditor either in whole or in part. The said decision of the liquidator is required to be communicated to the creditors concerned by post under postal certificate where proof is admitted and by registered post for acknowledgment where proof is rejected. It is further provided that it would not be nece .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ts creditors. I have gone through the records carefully and have heard counsel for the parties at length. I do not find any substance in the submission of counsel for the respondent that the petition is vague. The petitioner has clearly stated in his petition that after 1981, the provisional liquidator, Shri B. K. Kapoor, has not taken any steps and has failed even to admit or reject the proof submitted by the petitioner as required under rule 163. The petition is not either vague or lacking in particulars as has been alleged by the respondents in their reply. I further do not find any force in the submission of counsel for the respondent that the petition is not tenable because the same is motivated, untenable and coercive in nature. Exc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... be removed arbitrarily and the order of removal of the liquidator should only be passed on some good cause being shown, viz. , that the liquidator has failed to protect the interests of all persons concerned, that is the company, contributors and the creditors. The point, therefore, which arises for consideration is as to whether the petitioner has been able to show good cause for the removal of Shri B. K. Kapoor as liquidator and for his replacement by an official liquidator under the supervision of the court. In my view, the petitioners have shown a good cause for the removal of Shri B. K. Kapoor as liquidator of the company. Shri Kapoor has not taken any steps for the protection of the interest of the creditors. Since the company had .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ari Puri, learned counsel appearing for the liquidator, argued that the liquidator was pursuing the cases vigorously on behalf of the company and that in fact he was able to obtain a decree in the sum of Rs. 8,50,000 along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent, against the State of Jammu and Kashmir in C. P. No. 35 of 1975. The total amount due to the company under this decree along with interest comes to Rs. 26,00,000 approximately and this shows that the liquidator had taken steps to generate funds so that the claim of the creditors may be cleared off. No doubt, in C. P. No. 35 of 1975, a decree in favour of the company in the sum of Rs. 8,50,000 along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent, has been passed but this does not absolve .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates