TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 194X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... need to evolve the NCLT with jurisdiction, inter alia, to liquidate a company may not have arisen. There are no merit in this submission for the reason, that the personal properties of the guarantors do not constitute the property of the company under liquidation. With those properties, the OL, in any event, would have no concern. In relation to the properties of the company under liquidation, possession whereof has been taken by the O.L., no irreversible steps have yet been undertaken. The impugned order passed by the learned Company Judge proceeded on the basis that the appointment of the IPR had been stayed by the NCLAT on 30.04.2019. The NCLAT stayed the appointment of the IRP on the ground that the Liquidator had already been appoi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntrol over the company under liquidation since, supposedly, it has no pecuniary interest in the matter. The OL is expected to function within the bounds of its duties and authority under the law. However, to us it appears that the OL is not willing to let go of its control over the company under liquidation. 3. We may observe, at this stage, that the working of the office of the OL has, in the past, left us with a sense of disappointment. In fact, if the office of the OL were to discharge its obligations and duties efficiently and completely transparently, may be, the need to evolve the NCLT with jurisdiction, inter alia, to liquidate a company may not have arisen. 4. The submission of Ms. Sindhwani, learned counsel for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the respondent company would, at all be liquidated and wound up. Even otherwise, we find that the rights of the workmen are protected, in respect of the assets dealt with under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 by virtue of Section 13(9) of the said Act. We, therefore, reject this submission of Ms. Sindhwani. 7. Mr. Patnaik has sought to advance his submissions to oppose the present appeal on behalf of the ex-management. We have made it clear to him that the ex-management has no locus standi in the matter, since the OL stands appointed and it is the OL which is representing the company under liquidation. In any event, Mr. Patnaik has advanced his submissions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... undation of the impugned order passed by the learned Company Judge stands destroyed. Even otherwise, the impugned order is in the teeth of our order in Action Ispat and Power Pvt. Ltd. V. Shyam Metalics Energy Ltd. Ors., CO. APP. 11/2019, decided on 10.10.2 019. 9. We, therefore, allow the present appeal and set aside the impugned order passed by the learned Company Judge in C.A. Nos. 1415 and 1416/2018 in Company Petition No. 518/2013 dated 30.09.2019. We allow these applications and transfer the company petition to the NCLT. 10. While issuing notice to the respondents on 22.11.2019, we had put the OL to notice that the Court would also consider the aspect of close monitoring of the security guards posted by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bmits that the office premises of the company under liquidation was also taken possession on 01.09.2018, where 1 guard is posted round the clock and, therefore, 3 guards are employed on shifts of 8 hours each. To proceed further, we direct the OL to place before this Court, on an affidavit, the following information. (i) The manner in which the security agencies are selected for empanelment. (ii) The agreement entered into between the OL and the security agencies for providing security at the aforesaid premises of the company under liquidation i.e. Hanung Toys Textiles Ltd. (iii) The names and other particulars of all the guards engaged by the security agency and deployed at the aforesaid two premises. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
