5….......The Apex Court, however, chose not to answer the issue and considering the law as it stands it is immaterial at what stage the official liquidator is appointed. If that be the position, we have no doubt in our mind that, considering the provisions of the securitisation Act, and the provisions of the companies Act, the provisions of the securitisation Act will prevail and no leave of the company Court is required either before winding up or after winding up for selling the secured assets. The respondent, therefore, even if had preferred an application for leave or moved under the provisions of the Securitisation Act, that really was not required. No leave was also required under the provisions of the R. D. B. Act. It was open to the respondent to initiate proceedings before the Tribunal under the debts Recovery Act or for realisation of the security under the provisions of the securitisation Act without seeking leave of the Company Court. It may also be noted that under the provisions of the proviso to section 13 (9) of the Securitisation Act, the workmen's dues are protected. In other words this, by itself will be an indication that the provisions of the Securitisation Act, will prevail over the Company Act. It was therefore, within the competence of the respondent to proceed to dispose of the assets under the provisions of the securitisation Act.…..................”
