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

2019 (5) TMI 1075

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... der section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, and thereby the said plea may be treated to have been waived, and that this court may direct the official liquidator to file appeal within reasonable time. The official liquidator is directed to file appeal before the Debts Recovery Tribunal within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and on filing of such appeal, the Tribunal shall dispose of the same in accordance with law, after giving notice and opportunity of hearing to all the parities, within a period of twelve weeks thereafter. Till the disposal of the appeal, the interim order granted by this court on May 2, 2018 shall continue. The official liquidator is permitted to incur expenditure with respect to the court fee and other legal expenditure including counsel's fee, by moving appropriate application before the Tribunal. - Company Applications Nos. 222 and 277 of 2018 in C. P. No. 67 of 1999 and I. A. Nos. 1, 2, 3 of 2018. - - - Dated:- 21-12-2018 - CHALLA KODANDA RAM J. Pasham Krishna Reddy for the applicant. M. Anil Kumar , official liquidator for respondent No. 1. Ambadipudi Satyanarayana for respon .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... SCC 381 and Pegasus Assets Reconstruction P. Ltd. v. Haryana Concast Ltd. [2016] 194 Comp Cas 310 (SC) ; [2016] 4 SCC 47 held that the official liquidator shall be given notice before the sale of secured assets. He contends that inasmuch as the official liquidator was not issued with any notice, the sale is liable to be set aside. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the first respondent- company, making reference to the judgments cited by learned counsel appearing for the official liquidator and particularly drawing the attention of this court to the Division Bench judgment of this court in Indian Bank v. Sub-Registrar [2015] 188 Comp Cas 518 (T AP) ; [2015] 3 ALD 427 (T AP) would submit that the law on the issue is well-settled that even the official liquidator is required to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal, if he desires to question any proceedings, particularly the sale proceedings made under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. He would also further submit that the official liquidator does not enjoy any special status and on the other hand, is free to raise any objection with regard to maintainability of the very company application. 6. I. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the land over an extent of acs. 24.22 gts. from the first respondent-Asset Reconstruction Company in C. A. No. 222 of 2018. In the company application, the said individual asserts that pursuant to the auction conducted by the asset reconstruction company, he became the successful bidder and he has also deposited 25 per cent. of the bid amount, amounting to ₹ 85,50,000 (rupees eighty five lakhs fifty thousand only), and sale confirmation letter dated March 15, 2018 was issued to him requiring him to pay the balance amount of ₹ 2,56,50,000 and that he is ready to pay the said amount and inasmuch as his huge amount is struck in the process, he is being put to great hardship and loss. Therefore, he prays for conformation of the sale in his favour by receiving the balance amount of ₹ 2,56,50,000. 12. Heard learned counsel for the official liquidator, learned counsel for the first respondent-asset reconstruction company, Sri Pasham Krishna Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in I. A. Nos. 2 and 3 and Sri Narender Reddy, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner in C. A. No. 277 of 2018, who is the auction purchaser. 13. Afte .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... notice of 30 days. Thus, the rules also ensure that the official liquidator is in knowledge of the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act in case the borrower happens to be a company under winding up . . . In the event in the capacity of a borrower the official liquidator is not satisfied with the decisions or steps taken by the secured creditor or the authorized officer, at appropriate stage it has sufficient oppor tunity to avail the right of appeal under section 17 of the SARFAESI Act before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. There is a right of further appeal under section 18 before the Appellate Tribunal. 17. The Supreme Court in Official Liquidator, U. P. and Uttarakhand v. Allahabad Bank [2013] 177 Comp Cas 426 (SC) ; [2013] 4 SCC 381, while considering the provisions under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, (for short the RDB Act, 1993), held that official liquidator being protector of interests of workmen and creditors, is liable to ensure that appropriate price is obtained by holding of auction in a fair, transparent and non-arbitrary manner in consonance with the Rules under the RDB Act, 1993 and if he is not satisfied with .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... fficult to conceive that there are two remedies. It is well-settled in law that if there is only one remedy, the doctrine of election does not apply and we are disposed to think that the official liquidator has only one remedy, i. e., to challenge the order passed by the Recovery Officer before Debts Recovery Tribunal. Be it noted, an order passed under section 30 of the RDB Act by the Debts Recovery Tribunal is appeal able. Thus, we are inclined to conclude and hold that the official liquidator can only take recourse to the mode of appeal and further appeal under the RDB Act and not approach the company court to set aside the auction or confirmation of sale when a sale has been con firmed by the Recovery Officer under the RDB Act . . . In view of the aforesaid analysis, we concur with the view expressed by the Division Bench and hold that the official liquidator can prefer an appeal before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. As he was prosecuting the lis in all genuineness before the company court and defending the order before the Division Bench, we grant him four weeks' time to file an appeal after following the due procedure. On such an appeal being preferred, the Debts R .....

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