Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2014 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (2) TMI 1354 - HC - Companies LawWinding up of Company - Restraint from Sale of the land, buildings, plant and machinery etc. of the company in liquidation by the State Bank of India (SBI) - direction to the SBI to hand over the entire auctioned assets to the Official Liquidator - Section 456 of the Companies Act - Maintainability of the application - HELD THAT:- In the present case, we are concerned with same question but so far as the Companies Act and the SARFAESI Act are concerned. The difference between the RDB Act and the SARFAESI Act may be immediately noticed inasmuch under the SARFAESI Act, the security is realized by the secured creditor without intervention of the Court whereas under the RDB Act, a recovery officer of DRT sells assets of debtor to recover dues, as certified by DRT. The decision of the Delhi High Court in KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD. AND MOHAN TRACTORS PVT LTD. VERSUS MEGNOSTAR TELECOMMUNICATIONS PVT. LTD. & ANR [2012 (9) TMI 1092 - DELHI HIGH COURT] is relevant to be noticed where an identical issue fell for consideration. In that case also, it was answered by holding that the Official Liquidator will have to approach the DRT under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, if he seeks to challenge the sale held by the secured creditor under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. The view of the Delhi High Court commends acceptance. In view of the answer to the question of maintainability, against the applicant, it is not necessary to deal with the factual aspects and the grounds for setting aside the sale, as urged by the applicants. Application dismissed being not maintainable.
|