Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2019 (8) TMI 1462

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of ₹ 6.25 Crores. Whether the Applicant is entitled to any relief as prayed for in the application with regard to Germ Plasm/Parent seed and packing materials? - HELD THAT:- It is clear from the letter dated 09.01.2018 that was written by R2 to R6 that R2 has taken cognizance of the fact that the Germ Plasm and the Parent seed were in the Custody of R6. Further to that, it appears that R2 has not taken any steps to secure the germ Plasm and parent seed which are valuable asset of the Company. It is also observed that though R6 has preferred a claim for the lease rental that are due from the R1 Company with R2 (while he was RP during CIRP). R6 has acted in a most reckless manner by throwing away the valuable asset of R1 Company in the dump-yard GHMC. R6 ought to have handed over the Germ Plasm and Parent seeds of CD to the RP/Liquidator so that the same could be sold and its value realized and eventually the claim of R6 is settled through resolution plan/liquidation. Subsequent to issue of his letter dated 09.01.2018 to R6, R2 has also remained silent and negligent with regard to Germ Plasm/Parent Seeds thereby losing the value of Germ Plasm/Parent seeds of the R1 Company. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hase of Factory land and building. (d) To Appoint an advocate or any other professional to find out the facts as to the veracity regarding the plant and machinery lying in the factory land purchased by R5. 3. Brief facts of the present Application are as under: 4. It is stated that the Liquidator has caused a loss of around 3 Crores of rupees in respect of Liquidation value of the Company by not valuing the Plant and Machinery. It is stated that the Liquidator has enriched himself in connivance with R5, who is the purchaser of the Factory Land situated at Medak District, Telangana. It is also stated in the Application that around a sum of ₹ 2.49 Crores has been unauthorizedly held by the Liquidator from and out of the sale of the agricultural lands of the R1 Company. It is also alleged that the Liquidator has utterly failed to maximize the value of the Assets of the Company as envisaged under the code and that no inventory or valuation of Germ Plasm was ever undertaken by the RP/Liquidator which was in the custody of R6. 5. Liquidator filed its Counter, denying the allegations made in the Application regarding the undervaluation of the Property and stated that he .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he SARFAESI proceedings that were initiated by SBI, Financial Creditor, during September, 2017, R5 stood as the successful bidder for Factory Land and building of the CD with a bid of ₹ 5.51 Crores and that the said sale did not materialize in view of the declaration of Moratorium by the Tribunal in respect of this CD. Stating thus, R5 prayed to dismiss the Application. 8. Counsel for R6 filed its Counter and stated that that around 34 tonnes of seeds of R1 Company was stored in their cold storage and that huge arrears of lease rentals from R1 Company was due to them. Accordingly, R6 has lodged a claim with the RP(Liquidator) representing the Corporate Debtor. It is further stated that the RP representing CD had no right to seal the portion of the cold storage in which the stocks of CD were stored with them. It is further stated that they issued a legal notice dated 14.04.2018 to the RP of CD requesting him to remove the entire stock of CD stored in their cold storage and that despite such notice the RP of CD never visited the cold storage plant of R6 and avoided taking inventory of the stocks of the CD. It is also stated that since huge lease rentals were due from R1 Comp .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ely Mr. K. Panduranga Mohan and Mr. Dhanapathi Rao dated 28.04.2017 and 02.05.2018 respectively. For valuation of Plant and Machinery, Liquidator has obtained valuation through two valuers namely Mr. Dhanapathi Rao and Mr. D.K. Reddy dated 28.06.2018 and 05.07.2018 respectively. As per the valuation report given by Mr. K. Dhanapathi Rao, the Liquidation value of the Plant and Machinery is valued at ₹ 46.85 Lakhs, whereas Mr. D.K. Reddy has assessed the fair market value at ₹ 66.33 Lakhs. 14. From Para 17 (Pg. 11) of the Counter filed by the Liquidator it is evident that the value of Factory Land and building was quoted to be inclusive of the Plant and Machinery lying therein. However, it is the contention of the Liquidator that the Liquidator had sold the assets for an amount of ₹ 18.65 crores as against the liquidation value of ₹ 12.83 crores given by the valuers appointed by the IRP and contended that the liquidator has realized almost 50% more than the liquidation value given by the valuers appointed by the IRP. 15. Admittedly, R5 in the sale held in pursuance to the actions initiated by SBI under SARFAESI Act, R5 offered to purchase the factory lan .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ip, availability of credit and balance the interests. The first order objective is resolution . The second order objective is maximisation of value of assets of the 'Corporate Debtor and the third order objective is promoting entrepreneurship, availability of credit and balancing the interests . This order of objective is sacrosanct. 18. In the backdrop of the superior ideals of the Code and from the foregoing discussions, it is observed that the total Liquidation value for subject Land and Building and plant and machinery as per the valuor appointed by the IRP is ₹ 656 Lakhs whereas the amount realized is ₹ 625 Lakhs. The difference in valuation of the subject assets as valued by the Valuer appointed by the IRP and the amount realized by the Liquidator is ₹ 31 lakhs. It is pertinent to note here that the auction purchaser i.e. R5 has filed a Memo undertaking that he is willing to pay the difference amount between the valuation and the amount realized on e-auction sale. 19. Further the R6 has caused loss to the Value of Assets of the Corporate Debtor by not protecting/handing over the Germ Plasm/parent seeds to R2 and dumping them. 20. In the resu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates