9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (9) TMI 974X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpanies Act, 1956 ( the Act ). The Liquidator took possession of movable assets and record of the company through District Magistrate, Lucknow. The company owned certain agricultural land in village Behsa and Mati, Pargana Bijnor, Tehsil and District Lucknow duly recorded in the relevant revenue records in the name of company (in liquidation). The Official Liquidator sought permission of this Court through report No. 51 of 1983 to sell the landed property of the company (in liquidation). By order dated 5-10-1983 this Court granted such permission to the Official Liquidator. When the Official Liquidator got the revenue records verified on 7-3-1988, it transpired that the entire land left over in the aforesaid villages belonging to the compan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arrayed as respondents. The case, as set up by the applicant, is that the winding up order had been passed by this Court on 16-4-1970 on a petition having been filed by Krishna Brick Field, Allahabad. The company filed Special Appeal No. 364 of 1970 in which stay order was passed on 22-4-1970, staying the operation of the winding up order which was confirmed on 2-11-1970. But the Special Appeal in question bearing Appeal No. 364 of 1970 was dismissed in default on 13-7-1973 and the application filed to restore the same was also dismissed on 20-7-1974. The winding up petition had been filed on 12-12-1967. Thus, in fact there was no effective winding up order upto 13-7-1973. On 2-2-1972 Seth Hiranand Ram Chandra Gurnani, the then Managing Dir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nter-affidavit A-17 narrating the history of the case. He has also filed as Annexure-7 to his counter-affidavit a copy of the order dated 13-8-1998 passed by the Additional District Magistrate (Supply)/Prescribed Authority (Ceiling), Lucknow in Case No. 3 of 1997-98, rejecting the application of the applicants dated 24-3-1998 for correction of papers. Rejoinder-affidavit A-18 has been filed by the applicant-Radha Krishna Gupta. 5. I have heard Shri A.K. Gupta, the learned counsel for the applicants and Shri Sunil Ambwani, appearing from the side of Official Liquidator. The submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants simply want the name of the company (in liquidation) to be mutated by way of correction in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the relevant provisions contained in the Act. It is not very material that such a prayer for re-mutation of the land in question in the name of the company (in liquidation) has been made by the applicants. In the proper sense, it may be so taken that the applicants are simply inviting the attention of this Court to this aspect of the matter that after quashing of the order declaring the land as surplus, it (land) should be recorded in the revenue papers in the name of the company (in liquidation) and the records should be corrected accordingly. 7. As per section 441(2) of the Act, in a case not covered by sub-section (1) of the said section, the winding up of a company by the Court shall be deemed to commence at the time of the presen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
