9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 966X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1956, for winding up of M/s. Team Metals Private Limited. The said petition was admitted on 05.04.2002. The date of hearing of the windingup petition was published in a daily newspaper 'Hindustan Times' (Jaipur Edition). Since no one appeared to oppose or support the petition, the winding-up order was passed by this Court on 18.07.2003. According to the applicant/appellant, the Directors of the Company learnt about the proceedings of the winding-up much after in the year 2007. Neither there are any dues of the secured creditors nor are there any dues against any unsecured creditors. The claim of the unsecured creditor M/s. Ispat Industries Limited, subsequently known as Jindal Steel and Power Limited, was settled long back. The unsecured creditors vide letter dated 21.11.2007 informed the Bank of Baroda that it has settled its dues with the Teem Metals Private Limited and stated that they would instruct their lawyer to withdraw the matter from the court. Mr. Anuroop Singhi, learned counsel for the applicant/appellant, submitted that when the dues of the unsecured creditors and those of the Bank of Baroda, were fully settled by the Management of the Company in 2007, there was no o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2003 was ex-parte and the dues of the unsecured creditor were duly settled. The appellant is the original promoter and thus cannot be deprived of its effort and property. No prejudice would be caused to the subsequent buyer as the amount of bid submitted by the subsequent buyer has been kept by the Official Liquidator in the fixed deposit which would be duly reimbursed to it along-with interest. Otherwise also, no claim as a matter of right can be made by the subsequent buyer. As regards the argument of the Official Liquidator that there are statutory dues of the Commercial Tax Department etc., it is submitted that they are all arising out of ex-parte proceedings, wherefor the applicant/appellant has taken separate remedy. It is therefore prayed that the appeal be allowed. Mr. Gaurav Sharma Saraswat, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 Official Liquidator, submitted that the applicant/appellant has relied on the letter dated 21.11.2007 written by Jindal Steel and Power Limited, Raigarh to the Bank of Baroda stating in the subject - the full and final settlement in the legal matter of Jindal Steel and Power Limited for Rs. 11,00,000/-, and therefore they have instructed their ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appeal and submitted after passing of the winding-up order on 18.07.2003, the Official Liquidator took possession of the assets of the company in liquidation and after getting the due valuation of the assets done, the notice for sale of the assets of the company by public auction was published. In the public auction, the highest bid of Rs. 1,81,00,000/- (In words - rupees one crore eighty-one lakh) of the respondent no.3 M/s. ECR Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., was accepted by the learned Company Judge. The sale was affirmed by the learned Company Judge by the impugned order dated 22.03.2018. The respondent no.3 paid the amount of Rupees One Crore and Forty Lakh in addition to already paid amount of Rupees Thirty Five Lakh through demand draft. The respondent no.3 took the possession of the property through the possession memo dated 11.09.2018 on the "As is where is and whatsoever there is basis" from the office of the Official Liquidator. The respondent no.3 has spent a substantial amount on purchase of the land of the company in liquidation and has incurred various liabilities and obligations in the market for the same and thus the finance, business and future of the respondent no.3 d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the report, held as under:- "27. It is a settled legal proposition that not only administrative but also judicial order must be supported by reasons, recorded in it. Thus, while deciding an issue, the Court is bound to give reasons for its conclusion. It is the duty and obligation on the part of the Court to record reasons while disposing of the case. The hallmark of order and exercise of judicial power by a judicial forum is for the forum to disclose its reasons by itself and giving of reasons has always been insisted upon as one of the fundamentals of sound administration of the justice - delivery system, to make it known that there had been proper and due application of mind to the issue before the Court and also as an essential requisite of the principles of natural justice. "The giving of reasons for a decision is an essential attribute of judicial and judicious disposal of a matter before Courts, and which is the only indication to know about the manner and quality of exercise undertaken, as also the fact that the Court concerned had really applied its mind." The reason is the heartbeat of every conclusion. It introduces clarity in an order and without the same, the or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a laconic order like "dismissed" or `rejected' will be made without passing a reasoned order or a speaking order. It is not, however, necessary that the order disposing of a writ petition or of a cause must be a lengthy one recording in detail all the reasons that played in the mind of the court in coming to the decision. What is imperative is that the order must in a nutshell record the relevant reasons which were taken into consideration by the court in coming to its final conclusions and in disposing of the petition or the cause by making the order, thereby enabling both the party seeking justice as well as the superior court where an appeal lies to know the mind of the court as well as the reasons for its finding on questions of law and facts in deciding the said petition or cause. In other words fair play and justice demands that justice must not only be done but must seem to have been done." In view of the above discussion, while not going into merits of the case, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order passed by the learned Company Judge for the reason of its being a non-speaking one. Ordered accordingly. The appeal is accordingly allowed. We make it clear that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
