9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 505X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the meeting of the share holders, secured and unsecured creditors of TAML. Pursuant to the said order a meeting of the secured creditors was held on 9th July 2011. 5 of the secured creditors representing 90.57% approved the Scheme. In the meeting of the equity share holders held on the same day, 62 share holders representing 100% of the members present and voting approved the Scheme. At the meeting of the unsecured creditors held on the same day, 41 unsecured creditors representing 99.07% approved the Scheme. It is stated that apart from the fact that the Scheme has been approved by over 90% of the share holders and secured and unsecured creditors of TAML, the Scheme will also benefit all the parties concerned and will be in public interest. 3. A copy of the Scheme has been enclosed as Annexure P-3 to Co. Pet. No. 425 of 2011. The main features of the Scheme have been set out in paras 9.10 and 9.20 of Co. Pet. No. 425 of 2011 as under: "9.10 Settlement with creditors: That the applicant contributories/shareholders and ex-directors, promoters with the help of Strategic Investor are able to work out settlement with majority of secured creditors ensuring revival and sustainabil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... P-8 (Colly). (*) Applicant has already approached SCB for settlement at Rs.45 lakhs and approval is yet to be received. Copy of letter for settlement is enclsosed as Annexure P-9. (@) IFCI has issued letter to revoke OTS but as per OTS terms, pending settlement amount will carry interest. (**) Dues of PSIDC and PFC have been paid full. B. Class II- Fixed Deposit Holder & Employee Dues Sl. No. Name Settlement offered 1. Fixed Deposit Holders 312.30 2. Employees claim 0.73 Total 313.03 C. Class III-Govt. Dues & Statutory liabilities No. Particulars Settlement offered (Rs. In lakhs) 1 Ministry of Commerce, DGFT, Ludhiana 90.00 2 Office of the Dy. Commisioner Excise Taxation -----do---- 11.81 4.38 3 Dy Excise and Taxation Comm, Ambala 25.19 4 Income Tax, Delhi 35.64 5 Municipal Taxes and other Taxes 61.19 Total (A) 228.21 Principal dues of Rs.17.78 lakhs of P.F. Department will be paid at Par. Sl. No. Name Settlement offered NCD Debenture Holders 170.00 Total (20% of principals) 170.00 E Class V- Lease Finance, ICD, Bills Discounting & unsecured creditors including unsecured ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ttlement and to revive company. The promoters had given personal guarantee and there is huge decree passed by Debt Recovery Tribunals. The promoters considered appropriate to settle dues of the creditors and revive operations, hence they requested close old family friend for help. Shri Karam Singh Bath resident of H.No. 285, New Jawahar Nagar, Jalandhar and Mr. Pavitar Singh resident of H.No.678, Urban Estate Phase-II, Jalandhar who are financially strong and capable of bringing funds agreed to help promoters by bringing funds through their closely held company M/s. Silverline BuildTech Private Limited having registered office at 306-L/1, Model Town Jalandhar, Punjab. The net worth of the said company is more than Rs.16 crores (sixteen crores) and net worth of Mr. Karam Singh Bath & family is around Rs.230 Crores (Two hundred thirty crores) and net worth of Mr. Pavitar Singh is around Rs.33 crores (Thirty three crores)." 9. A copy of the net worth certificate as on 30th January 2012 as duly certified by the Chartered Accountant ('CA') has been enclosed. It is pointed out that there are no imaginary figures either in the projected balance sheet or in the profit and loss account. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y TAML to IARC within four months of the sanction of the Scheme. 14. Counsel for the IFCI states on instructions that IFCI is agreeable that the balance amount owing to it can be paid to by TAML within six months from the date of the sanction of the Scheme together with simple interest @ 15% per annum. 15. Counsel for the IDBI acknowledges that out of the sum of Rs.49.20 lakhs owing to it, a sum of Rs.41 lakhs has already been paid. Further, a post dated cheque ('PDC') dated 31st March 2013 has been issued in its favour for the balance sum of Rs. 8.20 lakhs. 16. It has been stated by Mr. Arun Kathpalia, learned counsel appearing for the Propounders on instructions that the said PDC when presented for payment will be honoured. He further states that in the unlikely event of the cheque not being honoured IDBI can have recourse to all the remedies available to it in accordance with law. He also states that the former Director of TAML will give an undertaking by way of an affidavit to the above effect. 17. The above submissions have been considered by the Court. The broad principles governing the consideration by the Company Court of a Scheme presented to it under Section 394 of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to pay off some of the secured creditors as noted hereinbefore. Thirdly, the terms on which the balance amount will be paid to the creditors appears to be reasonable. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the creditors have conveyed to the Court that they accept the terms of payment as proposed. Therefore the objections of OL do not survive. This also accounts for the points raised by the RD in its report. 19. In para 2 (C) of the affidavit filed by Mr. Satish Thapar on 11th October 2012, the claims of the Government and statutory bodies as accepted by the Propounders have been set out. Mr. Arun Kathpalia, learned counsel for the Propounders, explains that these figures were taken from the Report No. 596 of 2012 dated 10th October 2012 of the OL which has enclosed as AnnexureBacopyofthereportoftheCommitteethathadexaminedtheclaimsofthe creditors as well as Government and employees. In the said report the claims of Government and employees have been set out as under: "C. Claims of Government and Employees (Preferential Payment) under Section 530. Claims Received Claims Admitted/ Rejected Remarks 1. Ministry of Commerce, DGFT, Ludhiana 90,00,000.00 90,00,000.00 &nb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n no objection till date has been received, it cannot be presumed that they have any objection to the Scheme as such. Nevertheless, Mr. Arun Kathpalia, learned counsel appearing for the Propounders on instructions makes a statement that the Propounders will file an affidavit in this Court within three days stating that if there are any further statutory or Government dues that may be found to be payable by TAML, they will be paid in accordance with law. With the above statement there are no further objections to the Scheme. 23. Accordingly, sanction is hereby accorded to the Scheme as propounded by the Propounders with the modifications as indicated hereinabove and subject to TAML filing an affidavit by way of undertaking in this Court within three days stating that: (i) the post dated cheque dated 31st March 2013 issued to IDBI will be honoured upon presentation. (ii) the balance dues of the IFCI will be paid within six months from today together with simple interest @ 15% per annum. (iii) IARC will be permitted to appropriate Rs.2.5 crores kept with it in a no lien account towards its dues. The balance dues of IARC will be paid within four months from the date of sanction of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l for the parties confirm that the sale was made to the Applicant of only 8.78 acres and possession was also given to him of that extent of land. 30. In the present application, it is now stated that in CA No.1178 of 2004, the prayer was in two parts. One relating to the area of the land and the other relating to removal of encroachment by the former Directors from the office of the unit which was sold to the Applicant in auction. Counsel for the Applicant states that although the said application was disposed of, nothing was said about the encroachment and that therefore the Applicant wishes to renew the said prayer regarding encroachment by way of this application. 31. Possession of the extent of 8.78 acres of land was given to the Applicant way back in 2004. The application earlier filed by the Applicant was also disposed of on 29th September 2005. The Applicant has waited for almost nine years thereafter to file the present application. It is, therefore, not possible for the Court to entertain his prayer at this stage. In the event that the Applicant is aggrieved by any unauthorized encroachment on the land in question, it will be open to the Applicant to take recourse to oth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
