2005 (8) TMI 384

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er the direction of this court. 2. Mr. Milan Kanungo has entered appearance on behalf of the opposite party-company in all the above cases. He has filed a memo along with documents showing that the opposite party-company has been seized by the Orissa State Financial Corporation under section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act 1951, on November 4, 2004, and proposals for settlement have been filed by the opposite party-company before the Orissa State Financial Corporation. Mr. Kanungo submitted that though the assets of the opposite party-company have been seized by the Orissa State Financial Corporation under section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951, but the same has not been put to sale as yet. He, therefore, su .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... orce the security and since the charge holder is the official liquidator, his power to consent is subject to the sanction of the court. It was therefore, held in the said decision that in the premises whenever there is a pari passu charge over any property of a company in winding up by virtue of the proviso to section 529 of the Companies Act, 1956, leave of the court is necessary for the sale of the property as the charge holder is the official liquidator. 5. However, from the facts of the said case, I find that in that case, an order was already existing by which the company was ordered to be wound up and the official liquidator was appointed as liquidator of the company. In the instant case, however, no such order has yet been pass .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ost industrialization and also recovery of such financial assistance if it becomes bad and similarly, the Companies Act deals with companies including winding up of such companies. It further held that both section 29 of the Act, 1951, and section 529A of the Companies Act have competing non obstante provisions but proviso to sub-section (1) of sections 529 and 529A being a subsequent enactment, the non obstante clause in section 529A prevails over the non obstante clause found in section 29 of the Act 1951. On the above analysis, it was held that the proviso to sub-section (1) of sections 529 and 529A of the Companies Act, 1956, will control section 29 of the Act, 1951, and the liquidator shall be entitled to represent the workmen an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X