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

2002 (12) TMI 496

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... question of any confrontation or usurping of the jurisdiction of the learned company judge or divesting the custody of the official liquidator, which custody, he has assumed by virtue of section 456 of the Companies Act. The limited direction of the Tribunal was to appoint an Advocate Commissioner and requiring the Commissioner to have an inventory of the properties, which direction undoubtedly the Tribunal possesses under section 19(18)(e) of the Debts Recovery Tribunal Act. For such direction issued by the Tribunal in exercise of power under section 19(18)(e) of the Act, no prior permission of the company judge under section 446 is necessary. In fact, the official liquidator should have co-operated with the Commissioner in making an inven .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ability to pay the amount. Before the filing of an application to the Tribunal under the Act, in a winding up petition before the learned company judge of the High Court in Company Petition No. 131 of 1999, the High Court appointed a provisional liquidator. An interlocutory application was filed before the Tribunal with the prayer that the official liquidator should be restrained from making any payment lying with him to the depositors of the company or to any other person. The Tribunal appointed an Advocate Commissioner for making an inventory of the properties, and when the Commissioner approached the provisional liquidator, the said liquidator replied that he is in custody of the property and all necessary steps are being taken to recove .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... perties, which properties remained in the custody of the provisional liquidator by virtue of application of the provisions of the Companies Act. It is this order of the Division Bench of the High Court, which is the subject matter of challenge in this appeal. Mr. G.L. Sanghi, the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant contended that decision of this court in Allahabad Bank applies in all force to the point in issue, and therefore the High Court committed an error in holding that the leave of the company court is necessary before an Advocate Commissioner could be appointed by the Tribunal for making an inventory. Mr. Rohtagi appearing for the respondents, on the other hand, contended that by operation of law, particularly the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 17 empowers a Tribunal to exercise on and from the appointed day, the jurisdiction, powers and authority to entertain and decide applications from the banks and financial institutions for recovery of debts due to such banks and financial institutions. The ancilliary power of the Tribunal to appoint a Commissioner for preparation of an inventory of the properties is in aid of the power of the Tribunal under section 17. This court in the case of Allahabad Bank referred to (supra) formulated the questions as to what is the extent and under what situations the provisions of section 446 of the Companies Act will have no application to a proceeding before a Tribunal under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mination of the judgment on this score in Allahabad Bank case. But in the case on hand, in view of the limited direction that has been issued by the Tribunal, we see no question of any confrontation or usurping of the jurisdiction of the learned company judge or divesting the custody of the official liquidator, which custody, he has assumed by virtue of section 456 of the Companies Act. The limited direction of the Tribunal was to appoint an Advocate Commissioner and requiring the Commissioner to have an inventory of the properties, which direction undoubtedly the Tribunal possesses under section 19(18)( e ) of the Debts Recovery Tribunal Act. For such direction issued by the Tribunal in exercise of power under section 19(18)( e ) of the .....

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