9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 1595X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... K. Ashar & Co. for the Appellant. Mr. R.V. Desai, Senior Counsel with Mr. V. K. Nair for Respondent No.2. Mr. Cyrus Ardeshir for Official Liquidator for Respondent No.1. Mr. A.Y. Sakhare, Senior Counsel with Mr. Rupesh Bobde for Respondent No.3 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD):- 1. The appeal arises from a judgment and order of a learned Single Judge in a company application that was moved by the Appellant for recalling an earlier order dated 12 February 2013 of the Company court. 2. M/s. Rajen Textile Private Limited, a company which is now in liquidation, mortgaged its leasehold rights in respect of the land bearing block Nos.399 to 403, 405 and 427 situated at village Barshi, District Solapur in favour of the Central Bank o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... institutions will have to be sold and disposed of by the recovery officer in pursuance of the recovery certificate issued by the D.R.T. under the provisions of The Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. In view thereof, I reject the present report made by the Official Liquidator. However, I direct the Official Liquidator to hold the properties subject to the orders passed by the D.R.T. in the said recovery proceedings which are pending before it. It is made clear that the Official Liquidator will hand over the possession of the premises as per the direction of the D.R.T. subject to recovery of necessary security charges and other expenses incurred by the Official Liquidator for protecting the said property." T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been incurred towards meeting the security charges in respect of the lands. Central Bank stated that after obtaining a valuation from a Government approved valuer, it considered it beneficial to accept the proposal for surrender of its mortgage security for a consideration of Rs. 140 Lakhs. Central Bank further stated that it was ready to abide by the orders passed by the Tribunal in regard to the portion to be paid over to the Liquidator to meet the claim pari pasu, for the wages of the workmen. While allowing the application, the D.R.T., Pune permitted the bank to settle its dues in accordance with the agreement which had been arrived at. 6. The Appellant filed an appeal against the order of the D.R.T. before the Debt Recovery Appellate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ghts, which constituted a security of the Central Bank of India had to be sold by the orders of the D.R.T. in the recovery proceedings and the Liquidator had a limited role. The Liquidator was directed to hold the properties subject to the orders that may be passed by the DRT and to hand over the possession of the properties in accordance with the directions of the Tribunal; (ii) Well over 45 years earlier, the company in liquidation was closed without any business activity. No income has been fetched from the properties which were in the hands of the Liquidator and the Central Bank, as a secured creditor had been paying the security charges and incurring expenses for several years; (iii) In view of the overriding provisions of the Reco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ide proposal. The Appellant proposed to deposit an amount of Rs. 1.75 Crores in 2012 subject to the condition that the bank shall give up all its claims not only in respect of the leasehold properties, but also in respect of free hold properties, though the claim of the bank was in excess of Rs. 25 Crores. The Appellant had not taken any steps to clear the liabilities of the company in liquidation and the offer made before the Company court was not bonafide. On these grounds, the company application came to be dismissed. 10. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant submits that the Official Liquidator could not have given his consent to the proposed settlement by which Central Bank accepted an amount of Rs. 1.40 Crores ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for non- removal of objections and an application for restoration is now pending. 12. The Company application, which the Liquidator moved before the Company Judge and which resulted in the passing of the order dated 12 February 2013 was merely consequential to the order passed by the D.R.T. The learned Company Judge was in our view right in coming to the conclusion that it would lie outside the jurisdiction of the Company court to sit in appeal over the order passed by the D.R.T., particularly having regard to the position that the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 provides for a self contained remedy for challenging orders passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal. In that appeal, it is open to the Appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
