9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 27X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e copy of the License Deed whereby the property in question is alleged to have been leased out to the respondent company (in liquidation) dated 02.06.1999 reserving payment of license fee of Rs. 80,000/- for use and occupation of the premises with provision for increase etc. has not been placed by the applicant on the record and the same has been placed on the record by the respondent/Canara Bank. Evidently, it is not a registered document either. Although, learned counsel for the applicant vehemently urged that an application has already been moved for revival of the company on 01.04.2024, the said fact was not disclosed while moving the present application. The authority of Mr. Piyush Kumar, who has filed the application as Authorized Representative of the Board has not been explained. No resolution of the Board of Directors has been placed on the record. Apparently, the sale deed dated 14.03.2005 has been executed after appointment of Provisional Liquidator by this Court vide order dated 26.10.2024. The decision in the case of RAVINDRA ISHWARDAS SETHNA VERSUS OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR, HIGH COURT, BOMBAY [ 1983 (8) TMI 187 - SUPREME COURT ] cited by the learned Senior Counsel for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 999 (Annexure A-2 in CO.APPL. 3176/2016) and extends for a maximum term of 9 years. A perusal of the same suggests that the company (in liquidation) was granted permission to use the basement and first floor of the factory premises to carry out its business activities. 3. A company petition seeking winding up was instituted against DAIL and vide order dated 26.10.2004, a Provisional Liquidator was attached to the company, and thereafter, vide a detailed order dated 18.11.2005, the company was ordered to be finally wound up and the Official Liquidator was appointed as its Liquidator, with the direction to take charge of the assets and effects of the company. In doing so, the Official Liquidator also took possession of the property in question and sealed the premises on the basis of the fact that the movables and records of the company were in the premises. 4. Reply dated 21.05.2012 has been filed on behalf of the Official Liquidator wherein it is stated that the averments made in the application cannot be substantiated in the absence of original documents being placed on the record. It has further been contended therein that the Official Liquidator is not liable to pay any compensat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order dated 18.11.2005, which read as under: 63. Admitted facts are that since the bank/consortium had to receive substantial amount, on 9th July, 2004, the company sent a letter to the bank informing that it was arranging a sum of Rs.75 crores to Rs.125 crores from an investor in order to augment the working capital and improve the cash flow. Thereafter, vide letter dated 23rd July, 2004 the company requested the bank to open a no lien escrow account in the name of the company for repayment of proposed loan of Rs.75 crores to the investors in 60 monthly installments. Accepting this request, the bank opened an escrow account in the name of the company on 24th July, 2004. Thereafter, two letters dated 12th August, 2004 were received by the bank from Mr. Ray and Mr. R. Karunanidhi and other signed by Mr. K.C. Palaniswamy. These were with regard to investors fund of Rs.75 crores and it is clear from these letters that the companies, namely, KCPAHL and CHPL were the notified investors and the amount receivables from M/s Data Access America on account of services rendered had no connection with the same. It was followed by letter dated 18th August, 2004 from the company seeking permissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a Access America Inc.in the account of the company. (e) Although as per the representations made, investors were to infuse Rs.75 crores, money received is US $ 17 million i.e. Rs.78.45 crores. (f) After receiving the amount, the ABN AMRO filed inward remittance certificate with RBI on 19th August, 2004 i.e. the same date declaring that the remittance was received in the account of the company against the outstanding bills of services rendered. (g) No permission of RBI has been obtained by any party for lending foreign exchange to an Indian company. 70. That apart, allegations of the bank need serious consideration that pursuant to the orders of this Court, ABN AMRO Bank had filed its affidavit which clearly shows that after receiving the amount in accounts of the respondent company, the same were transferred on different dates in to the account of Cheran Holding Pvt. Ltd. and on its sister concerns. On the filing of C.A. 36/05 by CHPL, it became apparent that the present management of the Company is fraudulently and illegally keeping the amount with its other companies, which is the security of the Bank and which was received in the account of the Company from Data Access America t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he management of the Respondent Company transferred Rs.18.03 Crores to Syndicate Bank on 20.08.2004. 10. It has been submitted on behalf of Canara Bank that the entire amount of Rs. 78.45 crores, which was illegally diverted, along with due interest, has not been repaid. It is pertinent to mention that the order dated 18.11.2005 was challenged by Cheran Holdings Private Limited in CO. APPL 3/2006 as also by Sporting Pastime India Limited in CO. APPL. 5/2006 before the Division Bench of this Court, which came to be dismissed vide order dated 20.11.2009. It would not be out of place to mention that several applications were filed by the parties involved in the present proceedings and the same were decided by the then learned Company Judge (as his Lordship of the Supreme Court was then) vide order dated 21.01.2011, whereby the following directions were passed: 36. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the following directions are issued:- (1) All bank accounts and deposits of CEPL, CHPL, SPIL and KCPAHPL are hereby attached. No payments will be made from the said bank accounts except with the permission of the Company Court. the aforementioned companies are also restrained from selling ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 14.03.2005 has been executed after appointment of Provisional Liquidator by this Court vide order dated 26.10.2024. 14. As pointed out by the learned counsel for Canara Bank, a perusal of the Master Data from the Ministry of Corporate Affairs as on 14.12.2023 would show that the registered address of the applicant company is at Cheran Towers, 6/25, Arts College Road, Coimbatore-641018, Tamil Nadu, which happens to be the registered address of the sister concern of the company (in liquidation) viz., Cheran Holdings Private Limited. It is also pointed out that no documents have been placed on the record which would indicate as to how the amount of sale consideration paid for the property in question was generated, considering that the paid-up capital of the applicant company is meagerly Rs. 5,35,000/-. It is also pertinent to mention that the father of Mr. K.C. Palanisamy has been one of the Directors of the applicant company and as per the documents placed on the record, 95.33% of the shareholding of the company is owned by the wife of the kingpin Mr. K.C. Palanisamy. 15. Before parting with the instant applications, the decision in the case of Ravindra Ishwardas Sethna v. Officia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
