TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (8) TMI 697
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e respondent-company. 2. The Court heard learned counsel on either side and looked into the materials available, in particular, the orders under challenge. 3. Admittedly, those two Company Petition Nos. 232 of 1998 and 186 of 1997 were filed seeking winding up of the respondent-company and for appointment of the Official Liquidator under the provisions of the Companies Act. 4. In those two company petitions, the learned Single Judge made an order, ordering for publication since it found that there was a prima facie case for liquidation. As against the said order, dated 25-10-2002 - Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd. v. NEPC India Ltd. [2003] 114 Comp. Cas. 207 (Mad.), the two appeals were preferred in O.S.A. No. 397 of 2002 and O.S.A. No. 440 of 200....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unsel Mr. P.S. Raman would submit that originally, the order that was passed by the learned Single Judge in the company petition as to the publication was challenged before the Division Bench of this Court and also before the Apex Court and both the appeals were dismissed. Under such circumstances, it would not mean that the company court can directly exercise its power under section 450 of the Companies Act and appoint the provisional liquidator to take over the assets of the company. The matter is pending from the year 1998. The company has been running and apart from that, it has shifted its business to the business of solar energy and it originally had number of debtors, out of whom, all have been settled except these two respondents. U....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dismissed. 7. The Court paid its anxious consideration on the submissions made and also made thorough scrutiny of the available materials. 8. It is not in controversy that in these two company petitions, pending before the company court, the learned Single Judge thought that it was a fit case where publication has got to be ordered and, accordingly, ordered so. It is also true that those orders were challenged before the Division Bench and also the Division Bench by an elaborate order, has pointed out the reasons that a prima facie case was made out and it was a fit case where the publication orders have to be sustained. Thereafter not satisfied, the debtor took it on special leave petitions. 9. It is also true that both the special leav....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ge reads as follows : "The Official Liquidator, High Court, Madras, is appointed as the provisional liquidator and has been directed to take charge of the assets of the respondent-company. The ex-directors of the company is directed to file their statement of affairs before the Official Liquidator within a period of 21 days . . .". Thus, so long as the order, appointing the provisional liquidator does not speak about the circumstances or reasons which impel the Court, the Court is of the considered opinion that the orders cannot be sustained. 11. It is true section 450 of the Companies Act empowers the company court to appoint the provisional liquidator in the initial stage of the proceedings, even then the Court, before appointing the pro....