Allowed

M/s Rupa Steels Ltd., (In Liqn) v. Industrial Development Bank of India

Telangana HC18 Sept 2012COMPA/780/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court permitted the Official Liquidator to sell company assets comprising land and buildings in Maharashtra as one lot on as-is basis, approved the sale notice, fixed the upset price at Rs. 27,40,900/-, approved tender terms, and allowed negotiation with bidders for a better price.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to sell assets as one lot, approving sale notice, upset price of Rs. 27,40,900/-, EMD of Rs. 27,40,900/-, tender terms, and allowing negotiation with bidders.

M/s Rupa Steels Ltd., (In Liqn) Vs Industrial… — Company and Corporate | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN COMPANY APPLICATION No.780 of 2012 IN COMPANY PETITION Nos.175/1998 & 92 of 1999

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

This application is filed by the Official Liquidator, on behalf of the company under liquidation, seeking permission of this Court to sell the assets of the company, comprising of land admeasuring Ac.35.483 cts together with RCC buildings & AC sheet sheds, situated in Gat No.161 and 162, old Sy. No.22 & 25 at Itkal village, Tuljapur Taluq, Osmanabad District, Near Sholapur, Maharashtra as one lot “on as is where is and whatsoever there is basis”; to permit the Official Liquidator to publish the sale notice inviting sealed tenders in Eenadu (Hyderabad & Marathi Editions) covering the area of Osmanabad District Maharashtra, and in the Economic Times, (Pune and Mumbai Editions); to permit the Official Liquidator to fix Rs.2,74,09,000/-; (i.e., the realizable value as given in the valuation report by the valuer), as minimum upset price; and permit the Official Liquidator to fix the EMD amount as Rs.27,40,900/-, and the cost of tender forms, and terms and conditions, as Rs.2,000/-; consider and approve the draft sale notice inviting sealed tenders, the terms and conditions for the sale of the properties, and the format of the tender forms; permit the Official Liquidator to open the sealed tenders in the chambers of the Official Liquidator in the presence of the intending bidders and secured creditors; and to permit the Official Liquidator to negotiate with the intending bidders, upon opening of the sealed tenders, to fetch a better price on the date of opening of the sealed

¶4

tenders.

¶5

In the affidavit, filed in support of the company application, it is stated that this Court, in C.P. No.175/98 and C.P. No.92/99 dated 07.12.2000, had directed winding up of the applicant company, and had appointed the Official Liquidator attached to the High Court as the liquidator of the company; on receipt of the winding up order, the Official Liquidator had taken possession of the assets both at Hyderabad and Itkal village, Sholapur, Maharashtra; C.A. No.1027 of 2002 was filed seeking directions to the IDBI to appoint a registered chartered valuer for valuation of the movable and immovable assets of the company; this Court, by its order dated 29.01.2003, had directed the IDBI to appoint a valuer to assess the value of the assets of the company under liquidation, and submit the valuation report; the valuer had submitted the valuation report to the Official Liquidator who, in turn, had submitted the said report dated 14.05.2003 to this Court; thereafter, on an application being filed by the Official Liquidator, this Court, by order in C.A. No.636 of 2003, had permitted him to sell the properties of the company under liquidation in four lots; sale of lot Nos.2 and 4 was confirmed by this Court vide its order dated 04.12.2003; however a fresh sale was directed to be conducted for lot numbers 1 and 3; the Official Liquidator received four offers for purchase of lot No.1; and, on an application being filed in C.A. No.2378 of 2004 to permit the Official Liquidator to accept the offer of Rs.34.50 lakhs as against the minimum upset price of lot No.1, this Court, had by its order dated 13.12.2004, confirmed the sale of assets in lot No.1. Thereafter, the sale in

¶6

respect of lot Nos.2 and 4 were also confirmed by this Court in the year 2004 itself, and the properties in the said lots 1, 2 and 4 were handed over to the purchasers as per the order of this Court.

¶7

The Official Liquidator, thereafter, details the efforts made by him to have the subject properties surveyed, and to the offers made thereafter. Reference is made to the order of this Court, in C.A. No.295 of 2012 dated 22.03.2012, wherein the valuation report submitted by IDBI was taken on record, and the Official Liquidator was directed to act in accordance with the valuation report. The valuation report shows the value of the land, of an extent of Ac.35.483 cts, at Itkal village near Sholapur in the State of Maharashtra to be Rs.27,40,900/- (realizable value). It is in such circumstances that the present application is filed by the Official Liquidator seeking the reliefs aforementioned.

¶8

Sri P.V. Markandeyulu, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents 1 and 2, would submit that, since the permission sought for by the Official Liquidator, to sell the assets, is on the basis of a valuation carried out by the IDBI, both respondents 1 and 2 have no objection for the company application to be allowed, and the relief sought for by the Official Liquidator to be granted.

¶9

I consider it appropriate, therefore, to permit the Official Liquidator to sell the assets of the company under liquidation, comprising land admeasuring Ac.35.483 cts together with RCC buildings & AC sheet sheds situated in Gat No.161 and 162, old Sy. No.22 & 25 at Itkal village, Tuljapur Taluq, Osmanabad District, Near Sholapur, Maharashtra, as one lot on “as is where is

¶10

and whatsoever there is basis”; to permit the Official Liquidator to publish the sale notice, inviting sealed tenders, in Eenadu Hyderabad & Marathi Editions covering the area of Osmanabad District in Maharashtra, and in the Economic Times, Pune and Mumbai Editions; to permit the Official Liquidator to fix Rs.2,74,09,000/-, (i.e., the realizable value as given in the valuation report by the valuer), as the minimum upset price; and permit the Official Liquidator to fix the EMD amount as Rs.27,40,900/-, and the cost of tender forms, and the terms and conditions, at Rs.2,000/-; the draft sale notice, inviting sealed tenders, the terms and conditions for sale of the properties, and the format of the tender forms are considered and approved; and the Official Liquidator is permitted to open the sealed tenders, in his chambers, in the presence of the intending bidders and the secured creditors. The Official Liquidator is permitted to negotiate with the intending bidders, upon opening of the sealed tenders, to fetch a better price on the date of opening of the sealed tenders. The Company application is disposed of accordingly.

¶11

Date: 18.09.2012 ____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J

M/s Rupa Steels Ltd., (In Liqn) v. Industrial Development Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Rupa Steels Ltd., (In Liqn) v. Industrial Development Bank of India

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

M/s Vidyuth Steels Ltd. (In Liqn) Vs M/s Vidyuth Steels Staff and Workers Union

M/s Vidyuth Steels Workers and Employees Union, Vs M/s Vidyuth Steels Ltd., (In Prov. Liqn.)

Dr. B. Devadas S/o Late B. Narasaiah Vs The Chairman cum Managing Director

M/s.Mazda Concrete Products Private Limited. Vs -

M/s.Patil Rail Infrastructure Private Limited. Vs -

M/S Annavaram Concrete Private Limited Vs -