Sri K Devananda Vs the Mandya National Paper Mills Ltd., (in Liqdn)

SRI K DEVANANDA S/O. LATE KRISHNAPPA @ KRISHNAN @ KRISHNASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT NO.129/A, MNPM HOUSING COLONY BELAGULA 571 606 MANDYA DISTRICT

¶11

Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

SMT. KASTURI D/O. LATE KRISHNAPPA @ KRISHNAN @ KRISHNASWAMY W/O. LATE MUNISWAMY AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS R/AT NO.78, 17^TH MAIN ROAD, J.C. NAGAR KURUBARAHALLI, BENGALURU 560 086

¶13

(BY SRI. PRAKASH K A., ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

…APPLICANTS

¶16

THE MANDYA NATIONAL PAPER MILLS LTD., (IN LIQDN) REP. BY ITS OFFICIAL LIQUIDARTOR ATTACHED TO HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA 12^TH FLOOR, RAHEJA TOWERS M G ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001

¶17

…RESPONDENT

¶18

(BY SRI. K.S. MAHADEVAN, ADVOCATE FOR O.L.)

¶19

2 -

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC:22600 CA No. 435 of 2024

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

THIS COMPANY APPLICATION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 446(2) OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 R/W RULES 6 AND 9 OF THE COMPANIES (Court) RULES, 1959 FURTHER R/W SEC. 151 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 , PRAYING FOR A DIRECTION TO THE “OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR”, TO EXECUTE THE SALE DEED IN FAVOUR OF APPLICANT No.1 HEREIN IN LINE WITH THE ORDER DATED 16^TH JULY 2004 PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN COMPANY APPLICATION Nos.12/02, 967/02, 511/01, TO 514/01, ETC. AND GRANT SUCH ORHER RELIEF AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT.

¶23

THIS APPLICATION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

This application is filed by the applicants under

¶27

Section 446(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 read with Rules 6 and 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, to direct the respondent - official liquidator to execute the sale deed in favour of appellant No.1, after collecting a sum of Rs.12,500/- from the applicant herein, in line with the order dated 16.07.2004 passed by this Court in company application Nos.12/02, 967/02, 511/01 to 514/01 etc in COP No.112/94.

¶28

3 -

¶29

NC: 2025:KHC:22600 CA No. 435 of 2024

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this application are as follows:

¶32

Applicant No.1 is in occupation of the quarters bearing No.129/A, situated in M.N.P.M Housing Colony, Belagula, which was constructed under the subsidized Industrial Scheme of the Government and allotted to the father of the applicants by the Company (in liquidation). The father of the applicants was working in the company (in liquidation) and he was residing in the quarters in question, since from the date of his employment. Some of the occupants of the quarters approached this Court in C.A.Nos.12/2002, 967/02, and other connected matters in COP.No.112/1994, and this Court has passed a common order dated 16.07.2004 directing the respondent Official Liquidator to execute the necessary sale deeds in favour of all the 300 occupants of the quarters at M.N.P.M. colony, Belagula, including the applicants, after receiving a total sale consideration of Rs.12,500/- per quarters from each

¶33

4 -

¶34

NC: 2025:KHC:22600 CA No. 435 of 2024

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

of the occupants of the quarters, within a period of three

¶37

months.

¶38

The father of the applicants, passed away on 01.02.1999, the mother of the applicants, passed away on 29.08.2012 and the brother of the applicants passed away on 13.06.2019. During the lifetime of late Raju i.e., the brother of the applicants, filed a company application in C.A.No.1473/2011, and the said application was allowed by this Court vide order dated 09.03.2012. It is stated that applicant No.1 is ready and willing to pay a sum of Rs.12,500/- to the respondent - Official Liquidator after obtaining necessary permission from the Court and prays to allow the application and direct the respondent - Official Liquidator to execute the registered sale deed in favour of applicant No.1 and applicant No.2 has no objection to execute the registered sale deed in favour of applicant No.1.

¶39

5 -

¶40

NC: 2025:KHC:22600 CA No. 435 of 2024

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel Sri.

¶43

Prakash K.A., for the applicants and learned counsel Sri. Jagdish Gowda Patil for the official liquidator.

¶44

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in a similar set of facts this Court has already allowed the applications, and directed the official liquidator to execute the registered sale deeds in respect of quarters situated at M.N.P.M. colony, Belagula. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the application.

¶45

Per contra , learned counsel for the official liquidator submits that the applicants have not paid the consideration amount. If the applicants fulfill the conditions, and pay the consideration amount, the official liquidator is ready to execute the registered sale deed. Hence, prays to dispose of the petition.

¶46

Admittedly, there is no dispute in regard to the passing of the order in C.A.No.346/2023 and C.A.No.210/2024 in COP No.112/1994 vide order dated

¶47

6 -

¶48

NC: 2025:KHC:22600 CA No. 435 of 2024

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

19.12.2024, wherein similarly placed applicants were there

¶51

in a similar circumstances, and the official liquidator was directed to execute the registered sale deed in favour of the applicants therein. The applicants stand on the same foot in and they are entitled for the benefit of the said order.

¶52

In view of the above discussion, I proceed to

¶53

pass the following order:

¶54

ORDER

¶55

i. The application is allowed.

¶56

ii. The official liquidator is directed to execute a registered sale deed in favour of applicant No.1, after receiving the entire consideration amount, subject to the applicants fulfilling the condition and furnishing the documents, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶57

Sd/(ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE

¶58

SKS

Sri K Devananda v. the Mandya National Paper Mills Ltd., (in Liqdn)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri K Devananda v. the Mandya National Paper Mills Ltd., (in Liqdn)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt S L Shamala Vs Sri S L Shridhara Murthy

Sri. Chikkamuniswamappa Vs Sri. C. Manjunatha

M/S. Sportz Village Foundation Vs Pearls Academy

M/S Bearys Properties and Developments Private Limited Vs Mr Shamsuddin Zia Jukaku

Smt. Padma Vs the Mandya National Paper Mills Ltd., (in Liqdn)

Dr Suresh @ Suryakant R Duggani Vs M/S Carl Zeiss India Bengaluru Pvt. Ltd.