Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Karnataka State Financial Corporation And Kirit Morzaria Versus M/s International Coach Builders Ltd., Karnataka State Industrial Investment & Development Corporation Ltd And M/s Himadri Enterprises Pvt. And Karnataka State Financial Corporation

2007 (1) TMI 621 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

C.A. No. 1719/2006, 18/2007 And C.P. No. 131/1988 - Dated:- 29-1-2007 - Mr. K.L. Manjunath, J. sri.S.G. Pandit , Advocate Sri Shreyas Jayasimha for the Appellant. Sri Deepak, Sri. Puttige R. Ramesh, Sri Udaya HoIla, Sri Ajay Kumar patil And Sri. S.G. Pandit for the Respondent ORDER C.A. 18/07 is filed by one Sri . Kirit Morzaria under Order-1 Rule-10 CPC to come on record as additional respondent C.A. 1719/06 filed by the KSFC to accept and confirm the sale of land and building of the company (i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the former director of the company (in liquidation). This court in C.A. 934/04 on 14.7.2006 has permitted the applicant KSFC to sell the assets in association with OL and KSIIDC, another secured creditor of the company (in liquidation) holding that further orders in regard to protection of pari passu charge in favour of the workmen would be considered at the time of confirmation of the bid when the amount is deposited by the bidder. Pursuant to the orders passed by this court in CA 934/04 dated .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Vijaya Karnataka' Economic Times' and Deccan Herald' on 2.11.2006. KSFC has produced three advertisements to show that wide publication was given inviting tenders from the competent bidders by fixing an EMD of Rs .450 lacs and fixing the reserve price of ₹ 450 lacs and thereafter KSFC has received offers from 12 persons and thereafter an inter-se bid has also been conducted by the KSFC in the presence of OL on 11.12.2006. In the inter-se bidding, R-3 M/S Himadri Enterprises Pvt .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the offer made by and confirm the sale in favour of R-3 2. Applicant in 18/07 who was the former director of the company (in liquidation ) has filed the application to come on record contending that the procedure followed oy the KSFC in conducting the sale is not in conformity with Rule-273 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 and this court while permitting trae KSFC to sell the property did not approve the procedure Lo be followed while conducting the sale. According to the applicant KSFC, pro .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

; ble Supreme Court rendered between the same parties INTERNATIONAL COACH BUILDERS LTD. vs. KARNATAKA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION reported in A.I.R. 2003 S.C. -2012. foresaid judgment has been rendered by the Hon' ble Supreme Court arising out of an order passed by this court in the very same matter. Relying upon para-32 (3), counsel for the applicant submits that KS?C could not: have sold the property without obtaining the directions from the Company Court and the sale should be made under .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sidered by this court. According to him, in. INTERNATIONAL COACH BUILDERS LID. vs. KANATAKA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION, Hon' e Supreme Court has held that OL without permission of the court cannot conduct sale. According to him, said judgment has no application to the facts of this case. It is his case that since properties were attached by exercising powers vested under Sec. 29 of the SFC Act prior to winding up of the company as per the judgment of the Supreme Court KSFC was required to o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e KSFC to alienate the property, property has been alienated in accordance with SFC Rules and therefore he contends that judgment of Hon ' ble supreme Court in INTERNATIONAL COACH BUILDERS LTD. vs. KARNATAKA STATE CORPORATION will not come to the aid of the applicant; He further contends that even If the applicant has considered as a proper party, since no injustice is caused to the applicant, even if the applicant is permittee to come on record, his grievance cannot be considered by this co .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ee leading newspapers and there was participation by many intending bidders. According to him, property though it is considered as a building, according to him, buildings are in a dilapidated condition, reserve price fixed by the KSFC after securing valuation report from the approved valuer TECSOK and that the property is situated about 9 Kms. Away from Hoskote and that the offer made by R-3 for ₹ 700 Iacs is exclusive of dues payable to the KEB and KIADB. According to him, offer made by h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t several opportunities were granted to the applicant to bring e better buyer and to show his bona fides called upon the applicant ' s counsel to deposit the money. Learned counsel for the applicant took time to find out buyers though the same is not recorded in the order-sheet It is to be mentioned here that after the arguments were heard by this court, case was posted to 25.1.2007 for dictating orders . On that day, a submission was made that applicant has secured an offer from a prospecti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

icant. Though this procedure is not required to be adopted by this court, in order to see that the company in liquidation gets more money and the interest of workmen and secured creditors is safeguarded, this court gave an opportunity to the ex-director of the company to bring a better buyer but he has failed to do so. 6. After hearing the counsel for the parties, this court is of the opinion that even if the applicant in CA 18/07 is considered to be a proper party, his objections cannot be acce .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version