9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 425X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 06.2009 by the learned DRT, Delhi Debt Recovery Tribunal along with due interest @ 18% per annum from the date of deposit. The other application being CO.APPL. 211/2024 has been moved on behalf of the Official Liquidator seeking condonation of delay in filing the OLR/Status Report bearing No. 15/2024. The same is condoned and OLR No. 15/2024 taken on record. Accordingly, the application bearing CO. APPL. 211/2024 stands disposed of. 2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the movable and immovable assets of the company (in liquidation) were ordered to be auctioned by the DRT in an OA bearing No. 148/2002, filed by the IFCI Industrial Financial Corporation of India being a Secured Creditor in terms of order dated 20.04.2006, and consequent thereto recovery proceedings were initiated. It is borne out from the record that since only the movable assets of the company (in liquidation) were mortgaged with the Secured Creditor, on the commencement of the winding up proceedings, IFCI was directed vide orders of this Court dated 01.08.2013 and 11.11.2014 to deposit the proceeds/funds realised from the sale/auction of as many as seventy six immovable assets of the company (in liquidation) with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ited in compliance with the order dated 03.06.2009, firstly by moving before the DRT; but based on the submissions of the learned counsel for IFCI, that such amount had already been deposited with the OL on 26.02.2015 comprised in remittance of Rs. 88.66 Lacs, the DRT declined his request giving him liberty to approach the Official Liquidator vide order dated 06.05.2015 and 23.05.2015 for the refund. 8. It is evident that the amount deposited with the DRT stood transferred to the IFCI on 19.03.2010, and the latter has claimed that the said amount subsequently stood transferred to the Official Liquidator in compliance with the orders of this Court dated 01.08.2013 and 11.11.2014. However, the issue which has arisen is that although IFCI has deposited a sum of Rs. 13,10,19,293/- with the Official Liquidator, it has failed to render/provide an account of the bifurcation of the monies realised from the sale of various assets, and as a result the Official Liquidator is unable to discern whether or not the said amount deposited by IFCI included the Applicant‟s deposit, which is sought to be refunded. 9. It is submitted on behalf of the applicant/third party objector, that the pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not mention the name of the applicant, either in the table which provides the details of the sale considerations of each of the assets/properties, or in the table enumerating the amounts refunded to the unsuccessful bidders. It is further urged that although IFCI has stated that the amount of Rs. 88,66,077/- deposited with the Official Liquidator on 26.02.2015, includes the amount payable to the applicant herein. However, in the absence of a property wise break-up of the amount, the averment of the applicant remains unsubstantiated. 13. A new twist in the tale came forth when IFCI subsequently filed an affidavit dated 12.05.2023, by which it sought to withdraw Annexure 'C' to its earlier affidavit dated 04.02.2022, claiming an inadvertent error in the same. In this regard, on behalf of the Official Liquidator it is urged that in case Annexure 'C' is withdrawn, the IFCI must comply with the directions of this Court and file a fresh break-up of the amounts realised from the sale of the properties of the company (in liquidation). On behalf of the Official Liquidator an alternate plea is also canvassed that in case IFCI is unable to provide a detailed break-up, it should place on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e a reply to the present application on 30th April, 2019. 7. On 23rd July, 2019, when the present application again came up for hearing, IFCI was once again directed to file a breakup of the payment proceeds pursuant to auction and to file a reply to the present application. 8. On 12th February, 2020, the IFCI was again directed to file a reply to the present application. The IFCI requested for time, yet again, to file the breakup of the amounts collected from the DRT and deposited with the Official Liquidator and was granted one week to do so. 9. Till date, neither has the IFCI filed a reply to the present application nor has the breakup of the amount received from the DRT been filed to this Court. 10. This is rank disobedience of the order passed by this court and may invite initiation of contempt proceedings against the IFCI. 11. Before doing so, the IFCI is granted, at request of Ms. Priyal Modi, learned Counsel for the IFCI, a further and final opportunity of ten days and no more to file the breakup of the amounts received from the DRT and furnished to the Official Liquidator, specifically stating the breakup property-wise, with respect to the properties which h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8,66,077/- paid on 27.02.2015. 18. However, the controversy still stood unresolved and thereafter a third affidavit dated 28.02.2024 came to be filed by the Deputy General Manager (Law) of IFIC consequent to the OLR No.28/2023 in which inter alia it was submitted that Annexure „C‟ filed with the first affidavit dated 04.02.2022 contained an incorrect figure inasmuch as the amount refunded to S.K. Trading, the highest bidder of the Haldwani property was wrongly also included and that the Haldwani property was entangled in litigation before the learned Civil Judge, Nainital, and thus, possession of the same could not be handed over by the DRT to the Auction Purchaser, and hence, such amount had already been refunded to the auction bidder. 19. By way of the third affidavit, IFCI sought permission to withdraw Annexure „C‟ to the affidavit dated 04.02.2022 bringing out that it required deletion of the entry pertaining to the Haldwani property, of an amount of Rs. 26,91,010/-, which was refunded to S.K. Trading in terms of the DRT order dated 13.04.2010. By way of the third affidavit dated 28.02.2024, a fresh Annexure „A‟ is submitted whereby certain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
