Allowed

The Seva Vikas Cooperative Bank Ltd. through Raju Tanwani(Spl. Recovery Officer) v. Fab Auto Parts Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

Bombay HC10 Jul 2018CA/198/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed the bank applicant to sell the mortgaged factory property and movable assets. Ordered coordination with the Official Liquidator, mandatory 48-hour notice for steps taken, and deposit of all proceeds without deduction.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed to sell the mortgaged property and movable assets subject to Official Liquidator's supervision and deposit of proceeds.

The Seva Vikas Cooperative Bank Ltd. through Raju… — Execution and Attachment | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

22.CA-198-2018.doc

¶2

1/2

¶3

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

¶4

COMPANY APPLICATION NO.198 OF 2018 IN COMPANY PETITION NO.1010 OF 2015

¶5

The Seva Vikas Co-operative Bank Limited

¶6

….Applicant

¶7

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN :

¶8

M/s. Krishna Sheet Processors Pvt. Ltd.

¶9

….Petitioner

¶10

Vs.

¶11

M/s. Fab Auto Parts Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ….Respondents

¶12

Mr. S.R. Nargolkar I/b. Mr. Aumkar Vijaykumar Joshi for applicant. Mr. Niraj Shah a/w. Mr. Devendra Tiwari I/b. Law Chamber of Siddharth Murarka for petitioner.

¶13

Mr. Mahendhar Aithe, Company Prosecutor for Official Liquidator present.

¶14

CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM, J. DATE : 10^th JULY 2018

¶15

P.C.:

¶16

1 Mr. Nargolkar, counsel for applicant states that if this Court is

¶17

inclined to grant prayer clause – (a), applicant will keep Official Liquidator informed of every step taken to sell Plot No.J-150 in “J” Block of Pimpri Industrial Area admeasuring 2100 sq. meters, in which the company in liquidation has leasehold rights, together with the standing construction of factory building thereon situated at MIDC Bhosari, Pune 411 026 (the said property) alongwith movables, if any, in the said property. Mr. Nargolkar states that minimum 7 days advance notice will be given to Official Liquidator of the date and time of auction so that Official Liquidator can remain present at the time auction and supervise the same.

Gauri Gaekwad

22.CA-198-2018.doc

2/2

2 In view of the statement made by Mr. Nargolkar, Mr. Aithe, Company Prosecutor for Official Liquidator has no objection. So also Mr. Shah, counsel for original petitioner.

¶22

3 Therefore, application is allowed and accordingly disposed in

¶23

terms of prayer clause – (a) which reads as under :

¶24

(a) That this Hon'ble Court allow the applicants to sell the said property i.e. land bearing Plot No.J-150 in “J” Block of Pimpri Industrial Area admeasuring 2100 sq. meters, in which the company in liquidation has leasehold rights, together with the standing construction of factory building thereon situated at MIDC Bhosari, Pune 411 026, subject to such terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.

¶25

4 Applicant is permitted to take steps to sell the said property at its cost for advertisement etc. and also conduct the sale the property under advise and in co-ordination with Official Liquidator. Every step taken, if applicant is unable to inform in advance, the same to be communicated to Official Liquidator, giving reasons as to why it could not be communicated earlier, within 48 hours of taking such steps. In any event, once the date and time for auction is fixed, Official Liquidator to be informed atleast four days before the notice inviting bids is advertised.

¶26

5 It is clarified that the sale will be subject to confirmation by this Court. All sales proceeds should be deposited with Official Liquidator without any deduction.

¶27

Gauri Gaekwad

The Seva Vikas Cooperative Bank Ltd. through Raju Tanwani(Spl. Recovery Officer) v. Fab Auto Parts Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Seva Vikas Cooperative Bank Ltd. through Raju Tanwani(Spl. Recovery Officer) v. Fab Auto Parts Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

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

Borouge Pte Ltd. Vs Multi Flex Lami Print Ltd. (Cin U22219MH1991PLC060717)

C. D. Safety and Security Serivces Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Official Liquidator of Reacto Industries Ltd. (in Liqn.)

C. D. Safety and Security Serivces Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Official Liquidator of Meghatul Industries Ltd. (in Liqn.)

Asset Care Reconstruction Enterprise Vs Hcc Real Estate Ltd.

Ifci Ltd. Vs Hcc Real Estate Ltd.

Vinay Raj Singh (Ex-Dir of Fourcee Infrastructure Equipments Pvt. Ltd) Vs Standard Chartered Bank and Anr.