Disposed

Shri Raju Patil v. the Official Liquidator

Karnataka HC1 Feb 2023CA/409/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this compressed order, the Karnataka High Court disposed of an application seeking a direction to the Official Liquidator to sell company property at guideline value. The court, noting guideline values do not reflect market value, rejected the request to deviate from public auctioning and directed an auction within four weeks of the Valuer's report.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed off. Direction to hold public auction of the property within four weeks from the day the Valuer's Report is obtained.

Shri Raju Patil Vs the Official Liquidator — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

CA No. 409/2022 IN COP NO.166/2001

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT

¶7

CA NO.409/2022 IN

¶8

COP NO.166/2001

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SHRI. RAJU PATIL, S/O SHRI PARAGOUDA B PATIL, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/O NO.J-7, M K OFFICERS COLONY, YANTRAPUR, HARIHAR.

¶11

…APPLICANT

¶12

(BY SRI. DEEPAK.,ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by CHETAN B C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR OF THE MYSORE KIRLOSKAR LTD., (IN LIQN) ATTACHED TO HIGH COURT OF KARJNATAKA, 12^TH FLOOR, RAHEJA TOWERS, BANGALORE – 560 001.

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SRI.K S MAHADEVAN.,ADVOCATE FOR OL)

¶18

THIS APPLICATION IS FILED UNDER RULES 6 AND 9 OF THE COMPANIES (COURT) RULES 1959, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR TO SELL THE PROPERTY MENTIONED IN THE SCHEDULE OF THE APPLICANT, BY ACCEPTING THE GUIDELINES VALUE A SUM OF RS.170/- AS DETERMINED BY THE OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR & ETC.,

¶19

THIS APPLICATION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

¶21

CA No. 409/2022 IN COP NO.166/2001

¶22

ORDER

¶23

This Application seeks a direction to the Official Liquidator to sell the property of the Company as in the Schedule by accepting the Guideline Value that generally are operated with by the jurisdictional Sub- Registrars. This is bit difficult to accept since the Guideline Values are notified only to ensure the payment of at least minimum stamp duty on the Conveyance. The Guideline Values do not reflect the market value of property, hardly needs to be stated.

¶24

Learned counsel appearing for the Official Liquidator opposes the Application saying that the normal procedure for disposing of the properties of the Company is public auctioning and there being no justification for deviating from the same the Official Liquidator may be permitted to go for public auctioning of the property. He also fairly submits that it is open to the Applicant to participate in the auction process. This sounds fair & reasonable.

¶25

CA No. 409/2022 IN COP NO.166/2001

¶26

¶27

In view of the above the subject Application is

¶28

disposed off. The auction shall be held within four weeks

¶29

from the day the Valuer’s Report is obtained.

¶30

Sd/JUDGE

¶31

Bsv

Shri Raju Patil v. the Official Liquidator

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Raju Patil v. the Official Liquidator

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

Sri K T Ramaiah Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri L H Almel Vs the Commissioner

Puttaraju Vs the State of Karnataka

Official Liquidator of Vs M/S State Bank of India

Shri S.M.Krishnamurthy Vs the Official Liquidator of

Kapil R Shiralkar Vs Office of the Official Liquidator of