TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>HC overturns transfer order, directs expedited winding up proceedings over NCLT referral under Section 434(1)(c)</h1> <h3>Fortune Furnitech Private Limited & Tapas Chakrabarty & Ors. Aloke Kumar Ganguly Versus Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd. Official Liquidator & And Anr. Shiva Shakti Security Services</h3> Fortune Furnitech Private Limited & Tapas Chakrabarty & Ors. Aloke Kumar Ganguly Versus Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd. Official Liquidator & ... Issues Involved1. Types of winding up proceedings to be retained by the High Court.2. Consideration of company paid staff in the Official Liquidator's office.3. Payment of expenses incurred by the Official Liquidator.4. Correctness of the learned judge's approach in transferring proceedings to NCLT.Summary of JudgmentIssue 1: Types of Winding Up Proceedings to be Retained by the High CourtThe court discussed the substitution of Section 434 of the Companies Act, 2013, and the relevant amendments. It referenced the Supreme Court's interpretation in *Kaledonia Jute and Fibres Pvt. Ltd. vs. Axis Nirman and Industries Ltd.* and *Action Ispat and Power Pvt. Ltd. vs. Shyam Metalics and Energy Ltd.*, emphasizing that the discretion to transfer proceedings to NCLT depends on whether an irreversible stage, or 'corporate death,' has been reached. The court concluded that since the winding up order was passed over a decade ago and no revival scheme was presented, the proceedings should not be transferred to NCLT.Issue 2: Consideration of Company Paid Staff in the Official Liquidator's OfficeThe court noted the significant role of company paid staff in the Official Liquidator's office, whose salaries are funded from the sale of the company's assets. The court emphasized the need to retain winding up proceedings to ensure these employees are compensated, as there is no provision for their absorption by the government.Issue 3: Payment of Expenses Incurred by the Official LiquidatorThe court acknowledged the expenses incurred by the Official Liquidator for security services and asset valuation, which were sanctioned by the court. It highlighted the duty of the court to ensure these service providers are paid from the sale proceeds of the company's assets.Issue 4: Correctness of the Learned Judge's Approach in Transferring Proceedings to NCLTThe court criticized the learned judge's decision to transfer the proceedings to NCLT without any application for such transfer and without considering the merits of the case. The court emphasized that the transfer should be based on an application by a party and after hearing all parties involved. The court set aside the impugned order and directed the winding up proceedings to be conducted and concluded by the High Court.Additional Grounds by Biswaroop Chowdhury, J.Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury concurred with the judgment but added that the suo-moto power of transfer under the 5th proviso to Section 434(1)(c) of the Companies Act, 2013, cannot be exercised where the petition has been served, admitted, or where the liquidator has been appointed. He reiterated that the learned judge erred in transferring the proceedings without any application and without considering the current stage of the proceedings, thus the order should be set aside.ConclusionThe court set aside the impugned order and directed the winding up proceedings to be conducted and concluded by the High Court, ensuring the payment of service providers and company paid staff. All appeals and connected applications, except APO 31 of 2022 with ACO 7 of 2023, were disposed of accordingly.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
