Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2015 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (3) TMI 1285 - HC - Companies LawSeeking to recall the winding up order - IARC has already instituted the proceedings under the RDDB Act and also under the Securitisation Act as claimed by ex-directors of the company - Held that:- We find that the same objection was again taken up by the Ex-directors of the Company in Liquidation before the learned Single Judge in OL Report No.5 of 2013. However, the same was also negatived by the learned Single Judge in its order dated 25th April 2014. These orders are not challenged and have attained finality. In this fact situation, it is now not permissible for the Appellant to challenge the validity of the winding up order in the OL's Report. So far as the objection of Mr. Nedumpara that exclusive jurisdiction to decide the legality or otherwise of the purported lease agreement is with the Rent Courts constituted under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act is concerned, the same is also without any substance. Firstly, the purported lease agreement is unregistered document. The document of lease is specifically required to be registered in view of the provisions of section 34 of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 and section 17 read with 49 of the Registration Act, 1908. Non compliance with these provisions, makes the document inadmissible in evidence and obviously the same cannot be relied upon. The document of purported lease is, therefore, rightly ignored by the Company Court. For the purpose of winding up process of the Company in Liquidation, the said premises belong to the Company in Liquidation. Be that as it may, under section 446(2)(d) of the Companies Act, the Company Court has jurisdiction to entertain any question of priorities or any other question whatsoever whether of law or fact, which may relate to or arise in the course of winding up of the company. Besides, under section 456 of the Companies Act, all the properties and effects of the company shall be deemed to be in the custody of the Court as from the date of the order for winding up of the company. In the light of these provisions, the Company Court is justified and has jurisdiction to decide the official liquidator's report and the impugned order cannot be faulted on that ground. The appeal is without merit and same is accordingly dismissed with costs of ₹ 10,000/-
|