2011 (8) TMI 964

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the auction purchaser. 2. We heard Sri M.K. Damodaran, the learned senior counsel for the appellant and also the other counsel appearing. The learned Company Judge noted that the Court had passed an order on 18-3-2011 permitting the Official Liquidator to take steps for sale of certain immovable properties belonging to the company. The Official Liquidator published notice on 23-3-2011 and the sale was conducted on 31-3-2011. The appellant-auction purchaser bid the property at an amount of Rs. 8,80,05,001. We further note that the learned Judge has referred to the objections of the ex-managing director of the company that the sale is conducted in haste and he opposed the request for confirmation on the ground that if more time had been give....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ntitles him from questioning the sale, it is submitted. He would submit that the sale secured the best price and the learned Company Judge erred in passing the order. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the ex-managing director submits that he does have shares. He would point out that the extent involved is about 8 acres and it will fetch much more price and the notice given is too short. Learned counsel on behalf of the share-holders would also submit that the property is situated in the heart of Kollam town and the price secured is not sufficient. Learned counsel for the Official Liquidator Sri Money would submit that the provisions extant in this matter is Rules 272 and 273 besides Rule 6 of the Companies (Court) Rules. Rules 272, 273 a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rmation of sale, the Official Liquidator has virtually accepted the decision of the Company Court as he has not chosen to impugn the order. No doubt, the auction purchaser has right to challenge the order. 6. When a question comes before the Company Judge as to whether the sale is to be confirmed necessarily three aspects must be borne in mind. Firstly, whether the sale is done in accordance with law, secondly, whether the sale is in the best interest of the Company and its shareholders, and, thirdly, whether it is in the interest of the creditors. Though there are no criteria indicated in Rule 272 of the Companies (Court) Rules to be borne in mind by the learned Company Judge, the power cannot be an unfettered discretion. The decision mus....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Apex Court. There the university had invited tenders for the construction of a veterinary college building. Respondent No. 1 therein filed a writ petition for quashing the decision of Respondent No. 2 considering him as disqualified for participating. It is in the context of jurisdiction we would think under Article 226 in particular that the Court inter alia made the following observations : "15. The aforesaid stand makes it crystal clear that Respondent 1 was prevented in submitting the required documents in time due to his personal difficulty and not for the time schedule attached to the notice inviting tenders. That was also not one of his grounds taken specifically in the writ petition at any stage. But only during the course of hea....