9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (4) TMI 611X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... village of Nellore Mandal and District. The application filed by the official liquidator under section 457(1)(c) of the Companies Act, 1956, for permission to sell the land in question is dismissed and the alleged auction conducted subsequent thereto is set aside. However, we make it clear that the company can be proceeded against other assets, if any - O.S.A. NO. 21 OF 2005 - - - Dated:- 19-4-2010 - B. PRAKASH RAO AND R. KANTHA RAO, JJ. M. Anil Kumar for the Official Liquidator. M. Narender Reddy, P. V. Markandeyulu, C. Ratnesh Sagar and Ms. Padrna Sharanappa for the Respondent . JUDGMENT B. Prakash Rao, J . The State through its District Collector, Nellore and the concerned Mandal Revenue Officer are the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5,50,000 and conducted the auction, wherein M/s. Jeevaka Kandasari Sugar Mills Ltd., Hyderabad, which is added as respondent No. 5 in this appeal quoted the highest consolidated offer of Rs. 780 lakhs and paid 20 per cent, of the offer by the cheque dated August 18, 2004. 3. In the meanwhile, the Mandal Revenue Officer issued a telegram to the official liquidator on August 17, 2004, claiming that an extent of acres 40.65 cents in Survey Nos. 445-A1, A-5, A-6, 525, 527 and 529A is assigned land, and therefore, it could not have been sold or alienated. However, admittedly the said land is in possession of the company in liquidation. Later, the said Mandal Revenue Officer and the District Collector, Nellore were impleaded. The official liq ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lakhs per acre to be deposited with the appellants herein out of the total proceeds. Therefore, the appellants cannot be permitted to take such objection and the same are not unsustainable. 4. Heard the learned advocate general and Sri Mr. M. Anil Kumar, Mr. C. Ramesh Sagar, Ms. Padma Sharanappa, Mr. M. Narender Reddy and Mr. P. V. Markandeyulu for the respondents. 5. The main contention urged on behalf of the appellants rests on the plea that the said property is an assigned land and therefore under section 4(1)( b ) of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Act, 1977, the same could not have been alienated, and further mere direction to deposit the said amount would not in any way cure the defect, and in view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered sale deed dated May 24, 1980, from one Balasada Venkata Janardhan son of Jagannada Rao. M/s. Pennar Steels sold the said property in Survey Nos. 445-A1, 445-A5, 445-A6, etc., to the said company in liquidation on February 8,1986. Thereafter, the said company in liquidation obtained loan facility from the State Bank of India, State Bank of Hyderabad and Industrial Development Bank of India by mortgaging the said properties as a security in Survey Nos. 445-A1, 445-A5, 445-A6, 521, 525, 527 and 529A. Thereafter, the proceedings for winding up came to be initiated in R.C.C. No. 20 of 2000, and accordingly the winding up order was passed on February 14, 2001, and the official liquidator became the custodian of the property as contemplated u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the provisions of the law concerning the assignments. Yet the official liquidator has sold the properties and filed a report on August 24, 2004. At this juncture, the Tahsildar filed an affidavit before the company court on December 28, 2004, pointing out that the property is valued between Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 1,50,000 per acre. Thereafter, the District Collector and Tahsildar were brought on record suo motu as per the orders of the company court on December 13, 2004, in R. C. C. No. 20 of 2000. No doubt, except making a claim that it is an assigned land and therefore it could not have been sold under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Act, 1977, the appellants have not evinced any interest nor cam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion is originally an assigned land. Once it is an assigned land irrespective of the course of the events or transactions of whatsoever nature, which may happen touching upon it, would not shed its shell and protective umbrella or assignment and the protection as contemplated under the law. Under the very provision, the State has ample powers to resume the lands and rest back. The State thus constitutes to hold over the reins over the land. There is no period of any limitation to divest of its whole right. Therefore, it cannot be said that merely because there has been certain laches on the part of the appellants herein or any of its representatives or officials, the legal instrument which has to be proved cannot be proved and would not hol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
