TMI Blog2009 (4) TMI 1047X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ime. According to respondent No. 1 herein, in terms of the loan agreement, the Company in liquidation had mortgaged the property in question in favour of respondent No. 1 herein. According to respondent No. 1, as the Company in liquidation did not repay the amounts in terms of the mortgage deed, vide two sale deeds dated 11.2.1999 and 16.2.1999, the subject lands stood sold in its favour with possession. In the meantime, it appears that petition for winding up was moved on 14th October, 1996 and the Company was ordered to be wound up on 10th March, 1999. Following the order of winding up, the Official Liquidator issued a notice on 1 st June, 1999 for handing over the assets and effects of the Company in liquidation. Under the above ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quidation. It appears that in this case apart from the subject lands there are no other assets except goodwill. This aspect is very important. If a Company does not possess any other assets then the interest of the creditors, both secured and unsecured, would be jeopardized if the transfer is validated. In this case it appears that Indian Bank was not heard. It was not even made a party. The Court has not examined the list of creditors both secured and unsecured whose security/claims would stand defeated on validation of the sale deed. Moreover, it is important to note that there was no prayer for validation in Company Application No. 1275 of 1999 and even without said prayer the Court has allowed validation which was erroneous. The High Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssets and according to Indian Bank the entire transaction allegedly has taken place after the commencement of the winding up process. We direct the High Court to de novo decide this matter uninfluenced by any of its earlier observations made in the impugned judgment. We express no opinion on the merits of the case. We grant liberty to both sides to make submissions in support of their case. Before concluding, we may state that the possession of the lands is with respondent No. 1 herein. Status quo as regard to possession is to be maintained till the Company Court decides the Application for validation dated 13th September, 2004. However, respondent No. 1 will not encumber the property. Respondent No. 1 will neither alienate the proper ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
