Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + SC Companies Law - 2008 (5) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (5) TMI 408 - SC - Companies LawConfirmation of the sale by a Court at grossly inadequate price, whether or not it is a consequence of any irregularity or fraud in the conduct of sale, could be set aside on the ground that it was not just and proper exercise of judicial discretion. In such cases, a meaningful intervention by the Court may prevent, to some extent, underbidding at the time of auction through Court? Held that:- Appeal allowed in part. As from the facts it is clear that the appellant’s bid was accepted in November, 2004. Immediately, it had deposited 25 per cent amount. The appellant also deposited remaining amount of 75 per cent on 12/13-4-2005. It would, therefore, be appropriate if we direct respondent No. 3 to pay an amount of Rs. 30 lakhs to the appellant which in our opinion would serve the ends of justice. Payment of Rs. 30 lakhs will serve as a "solatium to the purchaser for his trouble and disappointment for the loss of that which is perhaps a good bargain - the order passed by the Company Judge and confirmed by the Division Bench of the High Court are in consonance with law. But we may not be understood to have expressed any opinion on the allegations levelled by the appellant against the Official Liquidator. As and when the matter comes up for consideration before an appropriate Court/Authority, it will be decided on its own merits irrespective of the disposal of this appeal by us.
|