TMI Blog1994 (9) TMI 269X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent and defaulted payment sets forth the contention that the industrial concern as such alone can be sold and it cannot be sold piecemeal. The only point that arises for consideration is whether the first respondent has the authority to sell the machinery and equipment as one lot and the landed property with the building separately. The learned single judge, on a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, held that fairness and equity demand the sale of the assets of the appellant-company in liquidation at the earliest and any delay in the sale on technical grounds would only result in loss to all concerned. The learned judge further held that the attempt of the appellant is to deliberately delay the proceedings. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... all rights in the property as if the transfer had been made by the owner of the property. Sub-section (2) makes the position clear. Sub-section (5) states that in a case where the financial corporation has invoked the power under sub-section (1) it becomes the owner of the concern and it can sue or be sued in the name of the concern. Thus, from a reading of section 29 the indubitable position is that the financial corporation which has invoked this section can be deemed to be the owner of the concern and the transferee gets full rights in the property transferred. There is nothing in section 29 to hold that the financial corporation has its limitations in leasing or selling the property in a situation warranted under this section. Once ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... technical grounds would result in loss to all concerned. It is the common case that the machinery of the industrial unit would get further rusted and it may not be useful for the purpose of production of any other units. Taking that into consideration the learned single judge held that the sale of the machinery and equipment as one lot would be beneficial to the parties concerned. Another contention of the appellant is that section 529A of the Companies Act overrides the provisions contained under section 46B of the State Financial Corporations Act and so the first respondent cannot be allowed to exercise its power under section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act. Learned counsel relied on Kerala Financial Corporation v. Offici ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
