TMI Blog2008 (10) TMI 695X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... davit is filed by Vibhuti Tusharbhai Patel, the sole Proprietor of the Applicant Firm, in support of the Judges Summons. 3. Mr. N.V.Gandhi, the learned advocate appearing for the Applicant has submitted that on dissolution of the partnership firm of M/s Gita Timber Mart, as sole Proprietor, the Applicant is the owner of the land in question. The Company (in liquidation) is not shown as the owner of the said land in the record of rights. He has further submitted that under registered agreement of lease dated 15.3.1978 under Registration No. 2340 of 1978, the land in question alongwith built up area to plinth level was let out to one M/s. Gita Processors, a partnership firm. M/s Gita Fabrics Private Limited came to be incorporated under wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rty of the Company (in liquidation). He has further submitted that the tender issued by the Official Liquidator shows that the Official Liquidator was trying to sell away the entire property and / or land / building of the said Company (in liquidation). He has further submitted that the land does not belong to the said Company and therefore the Official Liquidator has no right, title or interest to seal the said land. He has further submitted that the building belongs to the Applicant and the Official Liquidator has put account books and other records of the Company (in liquidation) therein on or about 10.1.1992 and sealed the same. He therefore approached this Court under Section 446 of the Act seeking permission of this Court to file Civi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the period of 9 years and 6 months at the rent of ₹ 2.50 per month which was registered with the office of Sub-Registrar. As per the said agreement, the lease agreement expired in the year 1987. He has further submitted that the Company (in liquidation) did not pay any rent from the date of incorporation i.e. 23.10.1980. He has further submitted that after seeking leave of the Court under Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956, the Applicant has filed Civil Suit before the trial Court and the Applicant's claim of possession of the suit properties are subjudice before the trial Court. 7. Based on the report of the Official Liquidator, the Court has passed further order on 6.10.2008. The statement made by Mr. N.V.Gandhi, the le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is of the view that the claim made by the present Applicant seems to be quite justified. The property in question never belongs to the Company (in liquidation). The Company (in liquidation) was having only leasehold rights and the lease also came to an end in 1987. The Official Liquidator does not require the property in question for the purpose of winding up. There are no secured or unsecured creditors of the Company (in liquidation). The Bank's dues are also satisfied, the persons concerned have placed their declarations on the record of this case. Even the Applicant has also filed an undertaking to the effect that the Applicant would withdraw the suit pending before the Civil Curt. 11.In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
