Allowed

Maharashtra State Financial Corporation (Msfc) v. the Official Liquidator of M/S.Mahavir Butyle Rubber Industries Pvt.Ltd. and Another

Bombay HC6 Mar 2013CA/531/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court allowed an application by a secured creditor to confirm an asset sale and permit standing outside winding-up proceedings, subject to an undertaking to refund claims with interest and payment of advertisement charges.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; leave granted to stand outside winding-up and confirm sale; undertakings to refund claims and pay charges accepted.

Maharashtra State Financial Corporation (Msfc) Vs the… — Company and Corporate | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

CA531-12 in CP487-2007

¶3

Sequeira

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶5

COMPANY APPLICATION NO.531 OF 2012 in

¶6

COMPANY PETITION NO. 487 OF 2007

¶7

Maharashtra State Financial Corporation. .. Applicant

¶8

BIFR. .. Petitioner Vs The Official Liquidator of M/s Mahavir Butyle Rubber Industries Pvt. Ltd. (In Liquidation) & anr. .. Respondents

¶9

Ms Bhavna A.Anklesaria, for applicant. Ms Rupa Sutar, Assistant Official Liquidator present. Ms Yogini Chauhan, Assistant Official Liquidator present. Ms.Jaymala Raut i/b J.J.Associates, for respondent No.2.

¶10

CORAM: N.M.JAMDAR, J. Wednesday 6 March 2013

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

By this application the applicant Maharashtra State Financial Corporation seeks leave to stand outside winding up proceedings of the respondent Company and for confirmation of sale conducted by the applicant on 5 March 2010, in favour of M/s Anaj Corporation of India.

¶13

A perusal of the affidavit in support of the application shows that the applicant had sanctioned term loan of Rs.55 plus Rs.5 lakhs to the Company under liquidation and the property of the respondent Company namely plot No.A-6/3/1, MIDC Nanded, was secured under Indenture of

¶14

¶15

CA531-12 in CP487-2007

¶16

Mortgage dated 4 December 1989. The applicant accordingly, being a secured creditor and the property being mortgaged in favour of it, has sought leave as prayed for.

¶17

The applicant has stated that it has conducted sale on 5 March 2010 in favour of M/s Anaj Corporation of India for Rs.26.26 lakhs. On 7 February 2013, notice was issued to respondent No.2 SICOM Limited. The Official Liquidator has filed an affidavit on 9 January 2013 wherein the Official Liquidator has stated that pursuant to the notice of invitation of claims, the Official Liquidator has not received any claims so far and the applicant Maharashtra State Financial Corporation be directed to submit an undertaking and to pay advertisement charges.

¶18

The learned counsel for the applicant states that requisite undertaking will be given and charges will be paid.

¶19

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) to (d). The statement of the learned counsel for the applicant, that the applicant Maharashtra State Financial Corporation will submit an undertaking that if any claim is received by the Official Liquidator they will bring back the amount along with interest accrued thereon, is accepted.

¶20

The applicant Maharashtra State Financial Corporation will submit a written undertaking to that effect to the Official Liquidator within two weeks from today. The applicant will also pay an amount of Rs.10,473/- to the Official Liquidator towards advertisement charges within two weeks from today. Since the respondent No.2 SICOM is also one of

¶21

¶22

CA531-12 in CP487-2007

¶23

the secured creditors, it shall also submit the requisite undertaking with the Official Liquidator within two weeks from today.

¶24

Company Application is disposed of accordingly.

¶25

N.M.JAMDAR, J.

Maharashtra State Financial Corporation (Msfc) v. the Official Liquidator of M/S.Mahavir Butyle Rubber Industries Pvt.Ltd. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maharashtra State Financial Corporation (Msfc) v. the Official Liquidator of M/S.Mahavir Butyle Rubber Industries Pvt.Ltd. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Skr Bpo Services Private Limited Vs

New India Co-Op Bank Ltd. Vs Maharashtra Navnirman Kamgar Sena and 2 Ors.

Bharat Shetty Vs State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Dr. M.S.Kamath and Ors. Vs the Official Liquidator of M/S Pal Peugot Ltd.

Simba Chips Pvt.Ltd.(Now Name Chandged to Simba Enterises Pvt.Ltd.) Vs the Registrar of Companies, Maharashtra

T Aravinddakshan Nair and 61 Ors. Vs Matushree Textile Ltd.(in Liqn.) through the Official Liquidator