Mutyala Sai Ramesh v. M/S. Garvee Granites Ltd, (In Liquidation)
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENIY TWO PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR COMPANY APPLICATION NO.22 OF 2022 AND R.C.C. NO. 6 0F 2021 Between:
ai Ramesh, S/o Suryanarayana, Aged 39 yrs, Occu. Business Rl/o 0-71 4, Burhanpuram, Khammam
2. Gorrepati Kiran Kumar, S/o Venkateswarlu, Aged 36 yrs, Occu: Business, R/o Flat NO. 106, Sai Ganesh Town, Vijayanagar colony, Khammam
3. Kamsani Venkateswarlu, S/o Kamsani Ramaiah, Aged 43 yrs, Occu. Business, R/o H.NO. 3-17, Laxmi Puram, Edavali, Khammam Mutyala S H.N0.'1 1-1 ...APPLICANTS AND lVl/s. Garvee Granites Ltd, (ln Liquidation), Rep. by Official Liquidator, High Court, Hyderabad ...RESPONDENT Company Application Under Rules 6 & 9 of Companies ( Court) Rules 1959 r/w. Section 151 of CPC praying that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent to accept the offer of applicants to purchase the lands in Khammam district i.e., a). land adm. 9.2 acres in Sy.No.404 situated at Kachirajagudem village, b). Land adm. 1.425 acres in Sy.No.35/A situated at Arekodu village, c). Land adm. 1.8 acres in Sy.N0.3B9/B situated at Beravolu village, and d). Land adm. 6.20 acres in Sy.N0.233lB situated at Ammapalem village.
This Company Application coming on for orders upon reading the Judge's Summons and the affidavit dated 28-02-2022 filed by Mutyala Sai Ramesh Applicant in support of this Application and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Raj Kumar Rudra, Advocate forthe Applicants and Sri J. Srinadha Reddy, Counsel for the Official Liquidator for the Respondent. The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR COMPA. No.22 of 2o22 ORDER:
This application along with Judge's Summons under Section 9 of the Companies Court Rules, 1959 R/w 151 of CPC is filed seeking a direction to the respondent to accept the offer of the applicants to purchase the lands of the Company-inLiquidation situated in Khammam District i.e, (a) land admeasuring Acs.9.2 guntas in Sy.No.404 situated at Kachirajagudem Village, (b) land admeasuring Ac.\.425 guntas in Sy.No.35/A situated at Arekodu Village, (c) land admeasuring Ac. 1.8 guntas in Sy.No.389/B situated at Beravolu village, and (d) land admeasuring Acs.6.20 guntas in Sy.No.233/B situated at Ammapalem village.
2.
Heard learned Counsel for the applicants and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Official Liquidator. 3.
Applicants contend that in R.C.C.No.6 of 2O01, the winding up orders were passed by this Court on 29.O9.2OO1; that the Official Liquidator took possession of .the above properties of the Company-in-Liquidation and attempted for sale of the same on four oqcasions, last sale notice, being published irr the local ne',)r,spapers, is 11.01.201O & 12.01.2010, fixing the date of sale as 28.Ol.2OlO, but no one has shown interest to
purchase the said properties of the company in liquidation; that the applicants, vide letter dt.23.12.2O2j,, expressed their willingness to purchase the said properties at the rates mentioned thereunder and seeks a direction to the Ofhcial Liquidator to affect sale of said lands of the Company-inLiquidation in its favour. 4.
Counter affidavit on behalf of the respondent/Companyin-Liquidation has been hled by the Official Liquidator. By the said counter, the Official Liquidator has stated that though an attempt was made for sale of the above said properties on four occasions, offers were received only for two lots, i.e,, lot No.s 2 & 4, out of six lots on one occasion, aggregating to Rs.24,85,126/-, inclusive of penal interest; that this Court vide order dt.O3.0A.2O1O in CA.No.77Ol2OO9 closed the said application reserving liberty to the Official Liquidator to renew his request as and when offers are received; and that both the prevailing Market Value and the Market Value fixed by the SubRegistrar as per the information obtained from the records of the Sub-Registrar, are higher than the rate offered by the applicants.
5.
I have taken note of the submissions of the respective parties.
6.
Firstly, it is to be seen that no right would vest with the applicants to seek sa-le of the land in their favour by offering a price. Secondly, this Court, being a custodian of the properties of the Company-in-Liquidation, cannot adopt the method of pick and choose for disposal of the properties of the Company-inLiquidation for realization of its assets, since on the assets of the Company-in-Liquidation, it is the creditors and contributors, who have a right and it would be wholly improper to dispose of the assets in favour of a particular person, other than by way of inviting bids from the intending bidders. 7.
Thus, the present application filed by the applicants seeking sale of assets of the Company-in-Liquidation in their favour by making an offer, under letter dt.23.I2.2O21, is totally misconceived and cannot be permitted.
8.
Therefore, this application is devoid of merit and it is dismissed. It is made clear that the Official accordingly may take steps for disposal of four lots of the Liquidator property of the Company-in-liquidation by filing necessary application.
Sd/-B.S.CHIRANJEEVI JOINT REGISTRAR Cryv \ //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To The Official Liquidator. M/s. Garvee Granites Ltd, (ln Liquidation), Office at 1'' floor Corporate Bhawan, _NaSolet eanOragi;O';' Thattiannaram Village, Hayathnagar tr4andal, Ranga Reddy District, ielangana State pin Code 500 680.
t
2. f he Registrar of Companies, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of lndia 2no floor Corporate Bhawan, Nagole, Bandlaguda, Thattiannaram Village Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State Pin Code 500 680.
3. One CC to Sri J. Sreenadh Reddy, Official Liquidator, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.
4. One CC to Sri RAJ KUMAR RUDRA, Advocate (OPUC)
5. Two C.D.Copies \^N'-
HIGH COURT DATED:1810812022 \ \ "(G\s :_\ ssd A{ ,) J) tt cuO *
ORDER
COMPANY APPLICATION No.22 of 2022 IN R.C.C. NO. 6 0F 2001 DISMISSING THE COMPANY APPLICATION.
'x3