9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (8) TMI 374X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at various machineries like G.P.D. Plant and other machineries were auctioned out by the Sale Committee. The applicant Society had given a bid of Rs. 1.75 lakhs and the Official Liquidator has filed his report being O.L.R. No. 11/2004. This Court has accepted the report filed by the Official Liquidator and confirmed the sale in favour of the applicant Society. As per the said order, the applicant Society has paid the full consideration. After payment of full consideration, the applicant Society had started lifting materials. However, due to marriage season and shortage of labour and some disturbance and misunderstanding, the work of lifting the materials could not be completed within the stipulated period and hence, the extension of time for one month was sought for. Since the shareholders of the applicant Society are poor persons and the Society is suffering from shortage of fund, no rent should be charged from the Society for extension of time. 3. The Textile Labour Association which is impleaded as one of the party- respondent has filed the supporting affidavit stating that Textile Labour Association has no objection if the time prayed for is granted by this Court. 4. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with specific notice to all the secured creditors with a request to remain present at the site on the dates of delivery. No secured creditors remained present on any date during the course of delivery of the goods sold to the applicant Society. During the course of delivery of goods to the applicant Society, mob of workers of Calico and Jubilee Mills was assembling at the site and were interrupting the delivery by raising claims and counter claims of ownership of goods belonging to Calico and/or Jubilee Mills. However, with the consensus of the office bearers of applicant Society who are the members of committee of Textile Labour Association for Jubilee Mills and of the members of committee of Textile Labour Association for Calico Mills, the delivery of goods was given to the applicant Society during the period between 19-4-2004 to 18-5-2005. Due to ownership disputes between Calico and Jubilee Mills, utmost care was taken with the help of Textile Labour Association members to ensure that only the goods of the ownership of General Product Division are delivered. 6. The Official Liquidator has further stated that despite the above facts, certain complaints have been received by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce of the Officers of the Official Liquidator. It is the duty of the Official Liquidator to make adequate arrangement to give smooth deli-very of the goods sold to the applicant. When the delivery was given to the applicant Society, gate passes were issued and the applicant Society was in possession of the gate passes. It is, therefore, submitted that the apprehension made by the Official Liquidator in his report on the basis of the complaint is totally unfounded and hence, the extension of time as prayed for should be granted. 10. Based on the aforesaid reports, complaint as well as the affidavit filed by the applicant Society, this Court has passed an order on 31-8-2004 and notice was issued to the complainant, namely, Jeevanlal F. Parmar with a specific direction as to how he has come to know about 60 trucks goods having taken out from Calico Mills and to furnish detailed address of one Mr. Shaukatali against whom allegations were made by him in the complaint. The Official Liquidator was further directed to pursue the matter with the Security Agency and to ask the responsible person of that agency to personally remain present in the Court on the next date of hearing. The Of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Court that the goods sold to the applicant society were only worth Rs. 1,75,000 whereas the goods taken out in all these trucks are valued much more than Rs. 1,75,000. The Court was, therefore, of the view that a detailed investigation was required in the matter and for that purpose, presence of the Security Agency, Mr. Shokatali and complainant Mr. Jeevanlal Parmar and the responsible person of the applicant Society are required. Since the applicant Society has not filed any reply to the report of the Official Liquidator as well as the affidavit filed by Mr. Parmar, matter was adjourned to 22-3-2005. 12. On 22-3-2005, the Official Liquidator has placed 49 challans. The Official Liquidator has also informed the Court that he wrote a letter to Mr. Shokatali on 18-3-2005 informing him that the matter was fixed before the Court on 22-3-2005 and he has directed him to remain present before the Court. Despite the aforesaid intimation, Mr. Shokatali has not remained present in the Court when the matter was called out. The Official Liquidator has also placed on record the relevant papers of O.L.R. No. 11 of 2004. On hearing the parties on that day, the Court was of the view that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... licant and they have duly signed Gate Passes as well as Delivery of Challans. Mrs. Poonam Mathur, learned advocate appearing for the Secured Creditor has submitted that the report filed by the Official Liquidator clearly states that the materials not belonging to Jubilee Mills were lifted by the applicant and hence, proper inquiry is required in the matter. After considering the submissions of the respective parties appeared before the Court on 1-4-2005, the Court has directed the applicant Society to compare the items shown in the Delivery Challan and Gate Passes with the Inventory Report, statement of affairs as well as the list attached along with O.L.R. No. 11 of 2004. The Official Liquidator was also directed to seek explanation from the person of his office who has signed the delivery challans and in his presence the goods were allowed to be lifted by the applicant Society. 14. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 1-4-2005, the Official Liquidator has filed his report on 19-4-2005 wherein he has stated that he has sought the explanation of Shri Ketan Velani, a company paid assistant in his office who was deputed for the purpose of delivery of goods, sold to the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly mentioned in O.L.R. No. 11/2004 and after hearing all concerned, the sale was confirmed by this Court vide order dated 1-4-2004. 15. An affidavit was filed by Shri Arvindbhai Doshi, President of the applicant Society on 19-4-2005 wherein it is stated that a confusion was created by the report of the Official Liquidator that the applicant Society was sold the items only mentioned in the Inventory Report, but this confusion is unfounded as, in reality, the applicant was sold all the items which are mentioned at Page Nos. 56 and 57 of the statement of affairs. The furniture which was lying in the GPD unit was of a scrap value and if realistic valuation was put, then it would not fetch more than Rs. 15,000. It was in such a rusty condition that no purchaser will come forward. It was further stated that the very fact that the Sale Committee did not even think it proper to advertise sale of such items was itself sufficient to draw the inference that so-called furniture was absolutely in rusty condition andeven the representative of the Official Liquidator was also shown the condition of the items and, therefore, he was constrained to write in the Gate Pass as Misc. scrap etc. Ev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rated all the submissions which were made earlier and requested the Court to allow the present application and the applicant be allowed to lift the materials which was not delivered though sold to the applicant Society. 19. Mr. D.S. Vasavada, learned Advocate appearing for the applicant Society as well as for Textile Labour Association has submitted that the allegations levelled against the applicant Society are not substantiated by any cogent and clear evidence and merely on the basis of conjectures and suspicions, no action can be taken against the applicant Society. The applicant Society has lifted the goods which were sold to it and even part of the goods could not be lifted within the time granted by this Court and hence, the present application is moved. The scope of the present application is only to decide as to whether the time is to be granted or not. There is no justification, therefore, to level any charges or allegations against the applicant Society and to take any action in respect thereof. In support of his submissions, he relied on the decision of this Court in the case of Vajir Nagji Kesharaji v. State of Gujarat 1984 (1) 25 GLR 47 wherein this Court has t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lowed to be lifted which were sold and even if, additional goods were lifted, his client is not at all responsible. 24. After having heard learned advocate appearing for the respective parties and after having gone through various reports filed by the Official Liquidator, affidavits and counter affidavits filed by the respective parties and the documentary evidence produced on record, the Court is of the view that there is no question of granting the prayer made for extension of time in the present application as the Official Liquidator has himself stated in his report that the goods which were sold to the applicant Society were already lifted and nothing was left out. Hence, the extension of time which was prayed for in the present application for lifting the left out goods, is not granted. Even otherwise, by efflux of time, the said prayer cannot be granted by the Court. The delivery was started on or around 22-4-2004. The period of one month was over on 21-5-2004. The present application is filed on 8-7-2004. Thus, the application itself is belated one. The extension of time was sought for the period of one month and even before filing and during the pendency of this proceed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the applicant Society. The Official Liquidator is, therefore, directed to recover a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs from the applicant Society and on recovery of the said amount, same should be credited to the account of Calico Mills Limited. As far as the role played by the office of the Official Liquidator is concerned, the same is also not free from any doubt or suspicion. The explanation tendered by the staff member of the Liquidator s office is also far from truth. His only explanation is that he has not taken the key of Calico Mills and there is no access to the premises of Calico Mills. However, these facts have been controverted by the complainant, namely, Shri Jeevanlal F. Parmar and he has stated in his affidavit that fencing between the GPD Unit of Jubilee Mills and the Sulzer Unit of Calico Mills did not exist and that there was definite access to the Sulzer Unit of Calico Mills and through the Sulzer Unit to the record rooms. The Official Liquidator has, therefore, failed to protect the properties of the company, namely, Calico Mills Ltd., and did not take any care to see that only those goods were allowed to be lifted which were sold to the applicant Society. The Security Agency ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
