9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (5) TMI 845X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ator attached to the High Court as Liquidator of the Company. The proposal submitted by the Liquidator in the form of Report No.162 of 2006 for sale of the assets of the Company including land, building, plant and machinery, furniture, fixtures and all other movables (except records) at L.S. No.202/3P, SIDC Main Road, village Veraval, District Rajkot was approved by the Company Judge and a committee was appointed for conducting the sale. After due deliberations, the committee decided to advertise sale of the assets of the Company. In furtherance of that decision, advertisements were issued in vernacular and English newspapers showing reserve price of the land etc. as Rs.64 lakhs. After considering the bids and further offers made before the Court, the learned Company Judge passed an order dated 30-8-2007 and approved the highest offer of Rs.127 lakhs given by respondent No.2. Soon thereafter, the appellant filed Company Application No. 450 of 2007 for recall of order dated 30-8-2007 by stating that it was interested in making an offer of Rs.141 lakhs. The learned Company Judge dismissed the application by observing that the revised offer made by the appellant was an afterthought an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de-confirmation of sale and while considering the higher offer made by that appellant, since the original successful bidder had increased its offer to match with the offer made by the appellant in the appeal, the matter was accordingly decided. 15. Considering the over all view of the matter and looking to the facts and circumstances of the present case, the Court is of the view that since the present applicant is offering Rs. 1.51 crores and it is already deposited with the Official Liquidator, there is no reason not to accept the said offer. Therefore, the order dated 30-8-2007 passed by this Court in OLR No. 143 of 2007 is hereby recalled and the sale of Lot No. A of the Company in liquidation confirmed in favour of respondent No.2 is hereby cancelled. The Court hereby confirms the sale of Lot No. A of the Company in liquidation in favour of the present applicant for Rs. 1.51 crores. Since the entire sale consideration has already been deposited by the applicant with the Official Liquidator, the Official Liquidator is hereby directed to hand over the possession of the movables within one week from today and the sale deed be executed in favour of the present applicant within on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd. has already deposited an amount of Rs.1.51 crores. Respondent No.1 is, therefore, directed to deposit a demand draft for the balance amount of Rs.10 lakhs within three weeks and thereafter the matter will be taken up for hearing. However, it is made clear that as the appellant does not want to pay higher amount as has been offered by respondent No.1, he will not be permitted to submit any bid by offering a higher amount hereafter. The appellant submits that he shall only make his submissions on the next date. List it on 22-4-2008." 6. After undertaking the aforesaid exercise, the Division Bench of the High Court considered the question whether the learned Company Judge was justified in reviewing/recalling order dated 30-8-2007 on the ground that the appellant herein had offered better price and answered the same in negative. The Division Bench opined that the confirmed auction sale cannot be set aside merely because subsequently a higher price is offered by one of the bidders. 7. In the special leave petition filed by the appellant, this Court ordered notice on 24-9-2008. After about two years, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant gave out that his client is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... days to give a bid higher than the bid of Rs.7.5 crores given by the appellant. On 10-2-2011, learned counsel for the intervenor-cum-promoter submitted a note suggesting that his client is willing to offer Rs.7.55 crores. After considering the same, the Court indicated the parties that an order may be passed for public auction of the property. On 11-2-2011, learned counsel for the appellant and intervenor-cum-promoter stated that if the property is to be auctioned afresh, then their clients are not willing to deposit the amount in terms of their revised offer. 8. On 18-2-2011, the Court, after hearing learned counsel for the parties, intervenor-cum-promoter and Gujarat State Industrial Investment Corporation (GSIIC), passed the following order: "At the commencement of further hearing, Shri S. Ganesh, learned senior counsel appearing for Gujarat Industrial Investment Corporation, submitted that as on date a sum of about Rs.12 crores are due to his client being a secured creditor and it will be in public interest if the Court, instead of remitted the matter to the High Court, may accept the offer made by the intervenor on behalf of M/s. Chiripal Textile Mills Pvt. Ltd. in case it a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... senior counsel emphasized that the offer given in the first instance was extremely low and, therefore, the offer of Rs.7.60 crores made by the intervenor-cum-promoter should be accepted. 10. We have considered the respective submissions and carefully perused the record. Ordinarily, the Court is loathe to accept the offer made by any bidder or a third party after acceptance of the highest bid/offer given pursuant to an advertisement issued or an auction held by a public authority. However, in the peculiar facts of this case, we are inclined to make a departure from this rule. Admittedly, total area of the land advertised by the committee is 12,500 square meters and the same is situated in an important district of Gujarat. It is also not in dispute that the area has been substantially developed in last four years. The initial offer made by M/s. Patel Agro Diesel Ltd. was of Rs.83 lakhs and the highest revised offer given before the learned Company Judge was of Rs.127 lakhs. After acceptance of the revised offer by the learned Company Judge, the appellant stepped in and made an offer to pay Rs.141 lakhs. The first application filed by it was dismissed but the second application was a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
