Disposed

Tata Capital Ltd., v. M/S. Turbo Bharath Ltd., (in Liqn.)

Telangana HC20 Apr 2012COMPA/17/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted liberty to the applicant company to file an application for property sale later, considering them the sole secured creditor, and directed their inclusion in future applications by the Official Liquidator regarding the property.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to file an application for property sale as and when the liquidator decides; applicant to be made a party-respondent in related applications.

Tata Capital Ltd., Vs M/S. Turbo Bharath Ltd… — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN COMPANY APPLICATION No. 17 OF 2011 IN COMPANY PETITION No.151 OF 2009

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

This application is filed to permit the applicant company to stand outside the liquidation proceedings and pursue the other remedies available to it for recovering the balance amount of Rs.9,80,79,529/- due to it under the Arbitral Award dated 31.08.2010, and to declare the document No.2328 of 2010 in the office of the SubRegistrar, Hyderabad and document No.3806 of 2010 in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Malkajgiri, Ranga Reddy District to be valid.

¶4

Sri S. Sriram Reddy, Learned Counsel for the applicant, would submit that, since the applicant is in possession of the property in accordance with the directions of this Court in Company Application No.528 of 2011 in Company Petition No.151 of 2009 dated 01.12.2011, the petitioners are not, for the present, pressing the relief sought for, and it would suffice if this Court were to grant liberty to file an application afresh at a later date.

¶5

A perusal of the order in Company Application No.528 of 2011 in Company Petition No.151 of 2009 dated 01.12.2011, would show that this Court, while permitting the Official Liquidator to break open the locks of the premises, conduct an inventory and take into custody all books of accounts of the company under liquidation, also directed the Official Liquidator to lock the premises and entrust the key to the secured creditor (applicant). It is, thus, evident that pursuant to the orders of this Court aforementioned, the applicant has been granted custody over the premises and the building in question.

¶6

Sri M. Anil Kumar, Learned Counsel for the Official Liquidator would state that the statement of affairs, filed by the Managing Director

¶7

and Directors of the company under liquidation, is bereft of even the basic particulars; and certain information has been called for from the said persons.

¶8

Considering the fact that the security charges are to be borne by the applicant herein, as the sole secured creditor of the company under liquidation, and even if the dues of workmen are determined, necessary funds would be required to pay their dues, I consider it appropriate to grant liberty to the applicant to file an application afresh as and when either they or the Official Liquidator decide to put the property aforementioned to sale. The interest of the applicant would also be safeguarded if, in any application filed by the Official Liquidator, in relation to the property aforementioned, the applicant is made a party-respondent, and is given an opportunity of being heard.

¶9

Subject to the above observations and directions, this company application is closed.

¶10

_______________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J

¶11

20.04.2012 MRKR

Tata Capital Ltd., v. M/S. Turbo Bharath Ltd., (in Liqn.)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tata Capital Ltd., v. M/S. Turbo Bharath Ltd., (in Liqn.)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s.Madhava Holdings Private Limited. Vs -

M/s.Prestige Agri Inputs Private Limited. Vs -

Katanguri Satyanarayana Reddy, Vs the Election Commission of India

Mangal Precision Products Limited, Vs -

Galla Foods Limited Vs -

Shaik Khasim Bee Vs Ch.Suguna