9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 486X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se twelve applications, the applicant asserts that the applicant security agency was appointed under the instructions of the Official Liquidator to provide security arrangement in respect of immovable and movable assets of the concerned company in liquidation or in relation to those companies wherefor the Official Liquidator was appointed as Provisional Liquidator. According to each of these applicants they have provided security arrangement for sufficiently long time, which was duly approved by the Official Liquidator and also ratified by the Company Court. However, the charges payable for the said services have either remained unpaid in full or only paltry payment has been made; as a result, substantial amount is unpaid and is outstanding, payable by the Official Liquidator. The applicants have, therefore, approached the Company Court for a direction against the Official Liquidator to disburse the outstanding dues payable to them. 3. The principal reason cited for non-payment of the dues is on account of unavailability of funds in the account of the concerned company for whom the security services have been provided by the applicant. According to the applicants, merely because n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ervices, C.D. Securities Network Limited, Garuda Keepers (India) (P.) Ltd. and Bhagwati Allied Services are concerned, they have been engaged in 20 or more assignments respectively, unlike other six security agencies who have been engaged in far lesser number of assignments. In that, Crack Detectives (P.) Ltd. is engaged in respect of eight assignments; whereas Sadguru Security and Consultancy Services in five; Mahalaxmi Security Services in three, Guardian Facilities Management (Nagpur) (P.) Ltd. in two; Industrial Security and Fire Services Bombay (P.) Ltd. in one and Seven Star Security Services India (P.) Ltd. in one. To ascertain as to whether the security agencies are controlled by common persons in different names, during the course of hearing, counsel appearing for the parties were called upon to furnish information regarding the names of Directors/Proprietors/Partners of the respective security agencies. Pursuant thereto following information has been placed on record :- Sr. No. Name of the Security Agency Name of Directors/Proprietor/ Partners 1. C.D. Security Services Network Ltd. 1. P.P. Singh Ahluwalia - M.D. 2. Sona Ahluwalia - Director 3. Guruc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ise. Whether it is a case of laxity of the officials in the office of Official Liquidator or collusion by some of the officials to benefit selected security agencies, is not only a matter of serious concern but also requires deeper enquiry at the appropriate level. 9. Indubitably, the Official Liquidator is appointed to protect and preserve the properties of the company in liquidation for the benefit of the stake holders in that company. The role discharged by the Official Liquidator is similar to one of parens Patriae and in any case that of a trustee appointed under the orders of the Court for and on behalf of the stakeholders in the concerned company. The provisions of Companies Act, abundantly make it clear about the role and duty of the Official Liquidator, which he is expected to discharge, after being appointed by the Court in respect of the property of company in liquidation. Indeed, while discharging that role, the Official Liquidator has to avail of logistical support from different agencies, such as Chartered Accountants, Valuers and in particular security agencies to preserve and protect the assets of the company and to dispose of the same by realising its fair value f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity personnel deployed in the respective assignments was appropriate, having regard to the nature of assets (movable and immovable)? (It has been noticed in some cases that even in respect of insignificant assets of the company in liquidation, the number of security personnel engaged by the concerned security agency-purportedly under instructions of the Official Liquidator, appear to be disproportionately large.) II.Whether there was any justification for not expediting the process of sale of assets in question of the concerned company? III.Whether the assets which were available for sale, on account of long passage of time, have been siphoned off? This issue would arise in some of the cases where the creditors or other stakeholders have alleged theft or siphoning away of the assets inspite of security arrangement provided by the Official Liquidator. IV.Whether there is dispute about the fact that although the security agency has claimed charges for having deployed particular number of security personnel on the site, but in fact none or less number of security personnel were found patrolling the site. (Such grievance has been made in some of the cases by the stakeholders in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ticulars Qty. Nos. Sr. No. In Valuation Report Room No. 1 1. Fire Extinguishers 10 1 2. Electrical Control Panels with Capacitors, Switch Boards etc. 1 2 3. Computer Tables size: 4'9"x2'x2½' 17 3 4. Steel Cupboards Size : 4'x2½'x11/2' 1 5 5. Slotted Angle Racks Size: 2'x4'x7' 3 6 6. Tube Light with Fittings 48 7 7. Type Writers : Make: Godrej 2 8 8. Chairs 10 9 9. Vacuum Cleaner 1 11 10. Screen Monitor Size : 11" and 12" Model: Essen Make; Wipro 48 12 11. Tower Cabinets Desk Top Model: Fact Girder 02 06 } 13 Sr. Nos. Particulars Qty. Nos. Sr. No. In Valuation Report 12. Printers with Key Board 3 14 13. Ceiling Fan Size : 48" 1 15 14. Mega Bite Computers Prospectus Books 02 Racks 16 15. ERSA-Lotange ESU-250 Spannunge- 380V Lelstung-7KW 3x20AMP. ERSA- Ernst Gmbh & Co. KG-D 6980 01 17 16. Two Sitter Sofa 1 18,(i) 17. Big Size Plastic Boxes with Books 2 19 Roo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry belonging to the company in liquidation have been sold in December 2003. Thereafter the strength of security guards deployed at the site has been reduced to only one security guard per shift. Insofar as arrangement provided after December 2003 is concerned, there can be no difficulty in accepting the claim of the applicant in that behalf. (e)The question is, whether it was appropriate to permit deployment of three security guards per shift and additionally two supervisors for all the three shifts for the earlier period, having regard to the nature of property which was required to be protected. Significantly, when the movable were disposed of in December 2003, the value realised by the Official Liquidator is stated to be only Rs. 55,000. The claim of the applicant towards security charges far exceeds the value of the movables, i.e., above Rs. 16 lakhs. For protecting goods of such insignificant value, no prudent person would venture to engage security agency to the extent of three guards per shift and two supervisors for all the three shifts. That is incomprehensible. Notably, such heavy security arrangement was continued for almost five years from 1998 till December 2003. I ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which is the one of the request made on behalf of the applicant. (g)It is made clear that I am not expressing any opinion in respect of the claim of the M/s. Indra Optical Company who has taken out Company Application No. 1040 of 2007 for relief of possession of the self-same immovable property, which application will have to be decided on its own merits in accordance with law. 15. Re : Company Application No. 738 of 2007 (a)Insofar as the claim of the applicant in Company Application No. 738 of 2007, the winding up order in respect of respondent company was passed on 23-11-1998. The Official Liquidator took possession of the assets and properties of the respondent company (in liquidation) on 28-4-1999. The Official Liquidator took possession of the immovable property situated at Phool Baug, I.P. Patel Road, Goregaon (East), Mumbai - 400 063 which is approximately 817 square yards. The movable assets have been inventorised by the Official Liquidator in the report which reads thus :- Sr. Nos. Description Approx Qty. First Floor 1. M.S. Cupboard standard size 12 Nos. 2. Assorted Nylon netted chairs 27 Nos. 3. Table ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wner after the movable assets were sold on 4-6-2003. The sale proceeds from the movable assets is only a sum of Rs. 3,02,000, whereas the claim of the applicant towards security charges is in the aggregate sum of Rs. 12,18,938.67 ps. (b)The applicant claims to have appointed three security guards per shift and one supervisor round the clock. Indeed, the Official Liquidator has taken approval of the Company Court for deploying three guards per shift and one supervisor for all the three shifts. The question is whether the recommendation of appointment of heavy security in relation to the property of the company in liquidation as referred to above was warranted? I will advert to this aspect a little later. (c)It is not in dispute that the movable properties referred to in the inventory belonging to the company in liquidation have been sold on 4-6-2003. The question is whether it was necessary for the Official Liquidator to permit deployment of three security guards per shift and one supervisor for all the three shifts for the nature of property which was required to be protected. Significantly, when the movables were disposed of in June 2003, the value realised by the Official Liqui ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he event of any shortfall. The secured creditors will be free to contest the said demand, if that is open to them in spite of order dated 22-6-2001. The Official Liquidator while considering the claim of the applicant in terms of this order shall give opportunity to the secured creditor to establish the position that during the relevant period in fact no security guards were deployed on the site. That aspect will be considered on its own merits. In the event the case made out by the creditors is established, it would necessarily follow that the applicant will not be entitled to any payment during such period. In that case, the Official Liquidator will have to pass consequential order for recovery of commensurate amount from the applicant, if any. 16. Re.: Company Application No. 861 of 2007 (a)The company in liquidation was ordered to be wound up in terms of order dated 25-11-1998. The Official Liquidator took over possession of the immovable and movable assets of the company in liquidation on 15-6-1999. It is also seen that the applicant security agency was appointed to safeguard the assets of the company in liquidation which were taken over by the Official Liquidator on the sam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; Single 5 Double Head approx. 1.5 MT. 6 14. Work Shop (a) Shaping Machine 24" stroke without motor 1 (b) C/Lathe 4' bed without motor 1 (c) C/Lathe 8' flat bed without motor 1 C/Lathe 8' flat bed with motor 1 (d) C/Lathe 10' Gap Bed with motor 1 (e) Slot Angle Racks 6'x8' 4 Slot Angle Racks 8x4' 2 (f) Radial Drill 1 (g) Slotted Angle Rack Lot approx. 300 kgs. 15. Glass Furnace Condemned weight of steel approx. 6.7 MT broken scrap chimney Air Receiver 1 Steel Structural shed approx. 6.7 MT 16. Engine Scrap for D.G. approx. 1.5 MT 17. M.S Tank O/H 3'x4'x6' 1 M.S. Tank 3x3x3 1 18. F.O. Tanks 6'x6'x4' HT. 4 19. O/H conveyor Scrap approx. 2 MT 1 Sr. Nos. Description Qty. (Nos.) 20. Air Compressor without motor 1 Air Compressor without motor and head Air Bottle 1 M3 1 V Type only Crank case with pulley inte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , it is seen that the entire property was bounded by compound wall. As a result, access to the property was obviously not so easy. To protect such property, even if it was spread out to the extent of about four acres, having regard to the location of the property and the surrounding circumstances, obviously it cannot be said that it was imperative to deploy seven security guards for first and second shifts and eight security guards in the night shift with one supervisor in each shift. As aforesaid, the value of movables that are sold could fetch only Rs. 16.50 lakhs whereas the security charges claimed by the applicant is to the extent of Rs. 63 lakhs and above up to December 2007 since the date of appointment on 15-6-1999. In my opinion, the Official Liquidator will have to adjudicate the claim of the applicant agency afresh keeping in mind all the attending circumstances and the larger questions referred to hereto. (e)There is yet another aspect which in my opinion is significant for considering the claim of the applicant. Indisputably, the movable assets were sold on 27-8-2003 and the same were delivered to the purchaser in April 2004. On and from April 2004 what was required t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... creditors of the company in liquidation as also the ex-director to take a stand as to the justification and necessity of the arrangement provided by the applicant as is claimed by the applicant. 17. Re. : Company Application No. 483 of 2005 (a)The winding up order was passed on 10-4-2007. However, much earlier to that, by order dated 18-7-1998, the Provisional Liquidator was appointed to take over possession of assets and properties of the company in liquidation. The Official Liquidator, accordingly, took over possession of the immovable and movable assets of the company in liquidation on 24-8-1998. On the same day, the Official Liquidator appointed the applicant as security agency to safeguard the assets of the company in liquidation. The applicant deployed three security guards per shift (i.e., Nine per day). The inventory report discloses the nature of movable properties of the company in liquidation which reads thus :- Sr. Nos. Particulars Qty. Nos. 1. Air Compressor Unit comprising of : 1 (a) Elgi make Air Compressor, 2 stage type, cylinders 9.7 CFM, 1000 rpm with flywheel and belt drive arrangement all installed on foundation, radiator ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... table, texturing machine, accessories, spares etc., (Lumpsum) Rivet Making Machine (1 No.) Centre Lathe - Mysore Kirloskar make, 5' bed, 8' c/c with butting attachment (1 No.) Buffing Machine manufactured by M/s. Vijay Machinery 2000 rpm 1-5 HP motor (1 No.) Cooling Tower - Natural draft, G.I. Loures metal frame without spray nozzles etc., (1 No.) Sr. Nos. Particulars Qty. Nos. Machineries accessories stack in cartons (boxes) - 4 Nos. (Lumpsum) Chemical Doser Vessel - Wanson make - 5 Kg/sq.cm (1 No.) estal Drill Machine small size suitable for 1/2" drill (1 No.) Rivet making machine manufactured by Kaise Maschienen Fabric GmbH-Germany (2 Nos.) Control Panel - 12 compartments LT make 440V with voltmeter ammeters etc., (1 No.) ELECTRICAL :- 5. Electric motors in dismantled condition with approx. rating local, Siemens : (a) 5 HP TEFC 3 Nos. (b) 1 HP - Flg mounted 2 Nos. (c) 25 H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5 the applicant has been able to protect both, the movable as well as immovable assets of the company in liquidation by providing only one guard per shift basis. No tangible reason is forthcoming as to why the applicant insisted for providing three security guards per shift (i.e., Nine guards per day) for the same property. Thus understood, the claim of the applicant for charges of three security guards per shift basis is unacceptable. Significantly, the movable assets which have been sold on 14-2-2008 have fetched only Rs. 14.50 lakhs, as against the outstanding claim of the applicant which has mounted to Rs. 28 lakh and odd with effect from 24-8-1998. (c)The justification given by the counsel for the applicant is that nine security guards were deployed on the insistence of the Official Liquidator. Besides, the plot in question was not provided with boundary wall. Both these submissions will have to be stated to be rejected, insofar as the argument of non-existence of boundary wall is concerned, if the applicant could manage the situation with one security guard per shift since October 2005 till recently, there is no reason to accept the plea that higher number of security guards ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ets of the company within fifteen days from the date of receipt of valuation report. Relying on this provision it was argued that the security agency cannot be blamed for having engaged excess number of security guards to protect the property in question. According to the applicant, it is the prerogative of the Official Liquidator to suggest the number of security guards to be engaged to protect the property in question and the security agency is only required to abide by such directions. The Official Liquidator may indicate the number of security guards to be deployed in consultation with the secured creditors including the security agency itself, having regard to the exigencies to be provided for protecting the property of the company in liquidation. It is argued that the appointment of security agency is ratified by the Court and once that has been done, there is no reason to reopen the issue of appropriate number of security guards to be deployed by the security agency. (c) It is then argued that the fact that the security agency continued to provide the security arrangement without receiving any amount from the Official Liquidator towards their contractual entitlement, that c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n that the value of the movable assets has been notified as Rs. 3.85 crores. To preserve such valuable property, there can be no difficulty in accepting the arrangement already made by the Official Liquidator to be reasonable and neces- sary in the fact situation of this application. That, however, is not the position in every other case before me to which I have already adverted to at the appropriate place. (f)The argument of the applicant that the security agency has no option but to continue to provide security arrangement irrespective of not receiving any payment from the Official Liquidator, however, does not commend to me. There is no reason for the security agency to wait for several years and then come and assert their right before the Official Liquidator in the first place and then before the Company Court to release their outstanding dues. From the figures which are available from the record it is noticed that insofar as M/s. Reliable Industrial Services is concerned, it has waited to receive a sum exceeding Rs. 2 crores in relation to about 23 assignments only. Obviously, the amount has been allowed to mount in some cases from 1998 onwards, as can be discerned from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... could have moved the Court for appropriate directions with immediate dispatch. No plausible explanation is forthcoming as to what prevented the security agencies to wait for couple of years, in some cases almost nine years, to apply to the Court for suitable directions in spite of the fact that no payment was being received by them in respect of the stated services continuously offered by them to protect and preserve the assets of the company in liquidation. (i)Needless to observe that the security agency would be free to walk out from the arrangement on the date notified to the Official Liquidator in the communication sent to him, provided, the Official Liquidator is able to make suitable arrangement of appointing another security agency. Indeed, to preserve the assets of the company in liquidation, the Official Liquidator is obliged to submit his report to seek necessary directions not only to permit the existing security agency to walk out of the security arrangement but at the same time to appoint new security agency in place of the existing security agency on appropriate terms. If the Official Liquidator fails to submit such report and seek directions of the Court within rea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ort reads thus :- Sr. Nos. Items Qty. Location 1. Vehicles with Engines and gear box Models - BMW, Mercedez, Tempo etc. 6 Nos. In the compound MAS 4302 MHO-3902 MMS-30455 MAS-5987 MH01-2477 MMG-9455 etc. 2. Only Car bodies 15 Nos. In the compound and in the rear shed 3. F.G. Boats 40 Seaters 1 In the compound 4. F-G. Boats 2 Seaters 3 In the rear shed 5. Warping drum with motor and M.S. Frame 4 Main factory bldg., ground floor. 6. Creal for 400 bobins 3 -"- Sr. Nos. Items Qty. Location 7. Loose bobins (Code) 1½" MS Pipe with plastic cover 12" long 2000 nos. Main bldg; gr. floor scattered allower in loose condition & in boxes damaged. 8. Beam roles 3½" + 5" long 75 Nos -"- 9. Metering m/c with motor 1 Ground floor Godown 10. A very weighing platform (Mechanical - manual) looking capacity 1 -"- 11. Cloth rolls of 3-3½" wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n with effect from 24-5-1999 itself. Initially ten guards and one supervisor per shift totalling to 30 guards and three supervisors round "O" clock arrangement was provided. Justification for providing ten guards and one supervisor security arrangement as stated across the bar is that at the relevant time there was strong opposition from the workers and to preserve the property from any damage it was decided that atleast ten security guards with one supervisor round "O" clock should be engaged. That arrangement continued till April 2000 when the security arrangement was reduced to 5 security guards and one supervisor per shift totalling 15 guards and three supervisors round "O" clock. No explanation is forthcoming as to what prevented the Official Liquidator to proceed with sale of the properties in question in terms of provisions of section 457(2A) of the Act within the specified time. If that were to be done within specified time, the necessity of continuing of such heavy security arrangement would not have been necessary at all. However, the Official Liquidator submitted report for the first time in January 2002 to seek directions of the Company Court. The Official Liquidator wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... movable assets. (d)Moreover, it is nobody's case that there was no compound wall to the factory premises or that the movables were lying in open space without a compound wall. The factory premises could have been secured by closing the main gate/door. In that case it would be wholly unnecessary to provide such a heavy security in the factory premises. Even if the argument of the applicant that at the beginning there was strong resistance from the workers is to be accepted as it is, for the reasons already indicated and the finding reached in the earlier part of this order that there seems to be a consistent partem indicating that no sensitivity has been shown to observe proportionality of number of security personnel to be deputed on the site and for disposing off the assets with utmost despatch so as to take the order of winding up to its logical end which inevitably resulted in increasing of avoidable expenditure on security charges far exceeding the value of the assets in question. Even in this case the value of the movable assets recovered on 14-1-2003 is only Rs. 15.30 lakhs; whereas, the security charges from May 1999 till December 2007 have piled-up to around Rs. 34 lakhs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to be deployed since December 1999. It appears that an attempt was made by the Official Liquidator to sell the properties in question only in 2005. However, that did not fructify on account of stay granted by Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (CRL) Nos. 406-409 of 2004, dated 18-11-2005. The fact remains that the Official Liquidator did not take any steps in the matter till 2005. Be that as it may, the appropriate course for the Official Liquidator is to ascertain the present status of the stay order granted by the Supreme Court and if that order is already vacated, to forthwith put up the properties for sale. In the event the stay order is still continuing, the Official Liquidator will be free to proceed in respect of other properties which are not subject-matter of attachment such as at Aurangabad and Goa, if the same are available for sale. Steps for sale of those properties shall be taken forthwith by the Official Liquidator so that the outstanding claim of the applicant can be paid from the sale proceeds of the said properties of the company in liquidation. 21. Re.: Company Application No. 512 of 2007 (a)Insofar as Company Application No. 512 of 2007 is concerned, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on to continue the security arrangement for such a long period. All these aspects will have to be addressed in appropriate enquiry to ascertain whether it is an act of commission or omission of the officials of Official Liquidator and connived with the security agencies. In the event it is found that the inaction was on account of such connivance, the claim of the concerned security agency would become questionable in which case the matter will have to be viewed in different perspective. (c)For the time being suffice it to observe that the Official Liquidator will have to consider all these aspects before the claim of the applicant for outstanding dues is accepted. The Official Liquidator is directed to ensure that all the immovable properties are put to sale within the time specified by law and in any case within reasonable period from today. The applicant security agency would be entitled for payment subject to the outcome of the enquiry required to be undertaken in terms of the observations made in this order. 22. Re.: Company Application No. 1009 of 2007 (a)The company was ordered to be wound up in terms of order dated 7-12-1998. Consequent thereto the Official Liquidator to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion has already been answered by me in the earlier part of this judgment. 23. Re.: Company Application No. 101 of 2008 (a) As far as Company Application No. 101 of 2008 is concerned, the winding up order came to be passed on 23-1-2004. The Official Liquidator was, however, appointed as Provisional Liquidator by order dated 19-10-2001. The Official Liquidator took over possession of the assets of the company in liquidation on 20-2-2002 and appointed the applicant security agency to safeguard the said property. Although the Official Liquidator took possession of movable and immovable assets of the company in liquidation, however, in due course, it transpired that the property possessed by the company in liquidation was leasehold property. The owner of the property approached for possession of the said property. I am informed that the Rent Court has already decreed the suit for possession filed by the owner. On the basis of said Decree, the bailiff has taken forcible possession of the immovable property. The owner has, however, given an undertaking that the movable assets lying in the premises will be preserved. That assurance was given on 4-2-2005 by the owner. It appears that init ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Official Liquidator took possession of the movable and immovable assets of the company in liquidation. The movable assets of the company consists of following:- Sr. Nos. Place Quantity Items Main Hall 1 1 Shearing Machine 2 1 Press Break Bending Machine 3 1 Iron table for working 4 1 Hand Shearing Machine (small) kept in store room 5 1 Cutlery Machine 6 1 Lathe Machine 7 1 Grinder Machine 8 1 Working table 1st Gala 1 1 Vertical Drill Machine 2 1 Grinder Machine 3 1 Hand press Near Store Room 1 1 Weighing Machine 2 8 Welding Machine in store room Upstairs 1 1 Sewing Machine kept in store room Shed 1 1 Lifting Trolley Insofar as immovable assets are concerned, the factory premises is situate at Survey Nos. 290/297, Village Kondle, Kudus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thcoming. In any case, if the applicant could manage with one guard per shift since September, 2005. I see no justification as to why same arrangement could not have been accepted as proper arrangement with effect from 5-1-1999 itself. In the present case, although issue relating to excessive number of guards would be relevant for the period from January 1999 till September 2005, but there is yet another facet which needs to be considered, inasmuch as, no reason is forthcoming as to why the Official Liquidator was not in a position to proceed with the sale of the movable assets so that recurring liability would have been reduced. The amount payable towards security charges to the applicant has now piled up to over Rs. 9 lakhs. This is obviously on account of the inaction or act, of omission and commission of the officials of Official Liquidator in not taking prompt steps for sale of the assets in terms of requirements of provisions of Companies Act, and at any rate within a reasonable period. These aspects will have to be considered by the Official Liquidator in the light of observations made in the earlier part of this order while examining the claim of the applicant and to submit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bt that if such application is moved before the DRT, suitable orders would be passed in the interest of all concerned. For the purpose of sale of assets either by the Official Liquidator or the secured creditors at whose instance the DRT recovery proceedings are pending is common. Obviously, both would like to realize the best value of the assets of the company in liquidation so as to settle the outstanding claims and avoid paying recurring cost on security service charges therefor. 29. Needless to observe that in respect of the company in which no such DRT proceeding is pending and where there is no impediment in sale of the assets of the company in liquidation, there is no reason for prolonging the process of sale. In such cases, the Official Liquidator shall ensure that the assets of the company in liquidation are immediately put up for sale forthwith by following necessary procedure. It is only on realization of the sale proceeds that the claim of the concerned security agency can be satisfied or settled out of such amount to the extent it is found to be acceptable and legitimate. 30. In other words, in all cases, unless there is impediment in proceeding with sale of the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... solidated fund was created for the limited purpose of "paying salaries of the company paid staff" from the said fund. Accordingly, it is not possible to accede to the request of the applicants to issue direction to the Official Liquidator to disburse their outstanding dues from that fund. 32. Insofar as applicants are concerned, they are providing security services in respect of specific companies in liquidation. It is not as if their services are availed for all the companies under the control of Official Liquidator as is the case of the company paid staff. Moreover, as noted earlier, the outstanding dues of ten security agencies in respect of all the 104 assignments is over Rs. 12.87 crores. If the claim of the applicant is accepted as it is, it will far exceed the amount available in the consolidated fund to the extent of Rs. 9.28 crores. As aforesaid, the fund is required to defray the salaries and charges of Rs. 8.29 crores, towards Printing and Stationery Rs. 55.24 lakhs and Office Expenses Rs. 43.45 lakhs. In this view of the matter, there is no question of paying outstanding dues of the security agencies (applicants herein) out of the consolidated fund. 33. For the afores ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
