Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2013 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (8) TMI 650 - HC - Companies LawWinding up – Appointment of Official Liquidator – Official Liquidator were directed to take steps against the transfer of properties - Held that:- The management was not at all serious for revival - The assets were no more safe in the hands of the erstwhile management - It was fit and proper, Official Liquidator must take immediate step for possessing the assets and proceed with the winding up - Transfer of four properties were either made during the pendency of the reference or immediately before or during pendency of the winding up proceeding - In such event, the learned Judge was justified in directing Official Liquidator to take steps in this regard. The well-reasoned decision of the learned Single Judge would clearly show, the Court tried its best to find out a solution for revival of the company - The management was however, not serious - For 14 months, the matter was kept pending – On a combined reading of the aforesaid two provisions any transfer prior to date of the commencement of winding up proceeding or during the pendency would be void - Similarly, under the Sick Industrial Companies Act 1987 any transfer of immovable assets during pendency of the reference before the BIFR is prohibited. Appeal of ICICI Bank – Held that:- The direction of His Lordship for restoration of the assets was nothing but a direction upon the Official Liquidator to take lawful steps against the wrong - Such step would obviously deserve a regular proceeding upon notice to the transferee and/or the persons claiming title under them - ICICI bank claiming to be the mortgagee would be at liberty to contest such proceeding - Their apprehension is premature – Neither of the observations would suggest forcible repossession of the properties - it would require a lawful proceeding to be brought for the purpose - In case such proceeding was brought ICICI bank would be free to contest - intervention at this stage was not warranted – Decided against appellant.
|