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

2003 (7) TMI 573

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... anies (Court) Rules, 1959 praying to recall the order dated 14-12-2001 passed by this Court in C.A. No. 855 of 2001 in C.P. No. 133 of 2001 and restore status quo ante in the larger interests of the small money deposit holders, while C.A. No. 169 of 2003 has been filed by Sri C.V. Subba Rao, praying to stay the operation of the said order. 2. It is the contention of the applicants that the financial position of the company in liquidation is not so grave as to warrant its winding-up. According to the applicants, C.A. No. 855 of 2001 is a collusive application, the same having been filed by the 1st respondent M/s. Monetreck Computers at the behest of the company in liquidation, the applicants contended that the appointment of Provisiona .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and restricted. In support of his contention, that the Provisional Liquidator does not enjoy the same powers as that of the Official Liquidator, the learned counsel placed reliance on the judgment of the High Court of Madras in Sri Chamundi Theatre Mysore Talkies Ltd. v. S. Chandrasekara Rao [1975] 45 Comp. Cas. 60 . 3. Sri K. Gopala Krishna Murthy, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the secured creditor would submit that the company in liquidation is due to them monies to the tune of Rs. 26.00 crores. The applicants being only small money depositors and unsecured creditors have no locus standi either to question the order of winding-up of the company in liquidation or appointment of Provisional Liquidator. As the company .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... depositors cannot have any grievance with any of the actions of the Provisional Liquidators and his powers need not be limited or restricted. To support this argument, the learned counsel for the secured creditor sought to rely on the paragraph relating to the Position of the Provisional Liquidator 1 . 4. Heard the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned counsel for the secured creditor at length. 5. As can be seen from the averments and the arguments advanced on behalf of the applicants, the only grievance of the applicants is that in the event any money being realized through the sale of the properties of the company in liquidation, their claims would stand subordinate to the claims of the secured creditors, and th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ul to refer to section 450(3) of the Companies Act, 1956 which reads thus : Where a Provisional Liquidator is appointed by the Court, the Court may limit and restrict his powers by the order appointing him or by a subsequent order, but otherwise he shall have the same powers as a Liquidator. 7. By a reading of the above provision, it becomes clear that unless this Court limits or restricts the powers of the Provisional Liquidator either by the order by which he was appointed or by a subsequent order, the powers of the Provisional Liquidator will be the same as the Official Liquidator. In the instant case, it may be noticed that this Court while appointing the Provisional Liquidator as Official Liquidator of the company in liquidation .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ore so when no allegation of misuse of powers or any oblique motive is attributed to the Provisional Liquidator. Merely because the applicants are small money depositors and they would face difficulty in realizing their deposits from the company in liquidation, is not a ground for this Court to exercise its power under section 466 of the Companies Act, 1956 to recall or stay its order appointing Provisional Liquidator and appointing in his place an Administrator to administer the affairs of the company in liquidation. The applicants have not placed any material or proof to the satisfaction of the Court that the proceedings in relation to the winding-up of the company in liquidation are required to be stayed. Reliance placed by the learned c .....

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