Court permits 'going concern' sale of non-functional company with strict conditions

The court allowed for the sale of the company as a 'going concern' despite its prolonged non-functionality, emphasizing the need for evidence to support such decisions. The sale was permitted under strict conditions, including setting a reserve price equal to the total decree amount and obligations on the purchaser to settle all liabilities. If the 'going concern' sale failed within a specified timeframe, individual asset sales would proceed. The court aimed to balance the interests of the bank, workers, and creditors while ensuring legal compliance and creditor satisfaction in the liquidation process.

---

---

Issues involved:
1. Whether a court can pass an order for the sale of a factory as a 'going concern' after an order for the sale of plant, machinery, and movable assetsRs.
2. Whether selling the factory as a 'going concern' nullifies the execution of the decreeRs.
3. Whether the sale of assets should be limited to the security of the bank or include the entire companyRs.
4. What factors should be considered in determining the method of sale to maximize price and satisfy creditorsRs.
5. Whether compassionate considerations for workers justify selling the company as a 'going concern' despite being non-functional for an extended periodRs.

Detailed Analysis:

1. The appellant, a bank, raised concerns about the court's order for the sale of a factory as a 'going concern' after an initial order for the sale of specific assets. The appellant argued that selling the entire company would nullify the execution process, emphasizing the need to first satisfy the security held by the bank.

2. The appellant contended that the company in liquidation had been non-functional for over a decade, making revival as a 'going concern' impractical and financially burdensome for potential buyers. The appellant sought separate sales of plant, machinery, and movable assets to maximize returns and cover liabilities effectively.

3. The court considered the interests of the bank as the sole secured creditor and the total decree amount to determine the most suitable method of sale for maximizing creditor satisfaction. The court highlighted the importance of assessing a company's potential for revival or liquidation based on its operational status and financial health.

4. Citing precedent, the appellant relied on a case where sympathies for workers led to an unjustified sale of a closed company. The court emphasized the need for credible evidence to support decisions regarding the sale of a company as a 'going concern.'

5. Despite the company's prolonged non-functionality and failed attempts at revival, the court acknowledged the workers' interests and allowed for a final attempt to sell the company as a 'going concern' under strict conditions. The court set a reserve price equal to the total decree amount and imposed obligations on the purchaser to settle all liabilities.

6. The court granted a specific timeframe for concluding the sale, with a provision to revert to selling individual assets if the 'going concern' sale was not successful. The modified orders directed the Official Liquidator to proceed with the sale accordingly to satisfy creditors' interests effectively.

7. In conclusion, the court balanced the interests of the bank, workers, and other creditors by allowing a limited opportunity for the sale of the company as a 'going concern' while ensuring creditor satisfaction and legal compliance in the liquidation process.

---