1 ca374-11.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY APPLICATION NO.374 OF 2011 WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.833 OF 1981 Kanaiyalal Madhavlal Shah .. Petitioner and Kashinath Daulat Gharat & Ors. .. Applicants Versus Official Liquidator of M/s.Ipco Paper Mills Ltd. .. Respondent Mr.C.B.Kher i/b. Shamika Ranade Kher for applicants Dr.T.Pandian, Official Liquidator CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. 7th October 2011. P.C.: 1] It is stated on behalf of the applicants that the claims be readjudicated because of the reasons that are set out in the affidavit in support. It is contended that in the case of Brijbihari Chaube, the Official Liquidator has adjudicated the claim to the tune of Rs.37,615/-. While communicating the outcome of the claim what the Official Liquidator informed this applicant worker is that the balance amount has been rejected and a copy of the minutes is enclosed herewith. 2 ca374-11.doc 2] However, the applicant's Advocate states that the reasons for rejection of claim to the extent of Rs.55,540.55 (entire claim) has not been communicated. Further, as to why part claim is allowed is also not clarified. There are instances given of several workmen in the affidavit in support. 3] After having heard learned Advocate for applicant and the Official Liquidator so also with their assistance perusing the application and affidavit in support and reply, I am of the opinion that in the larger interest of justice, the Official Liquidator shall reconsider the claims of these 25 workmen only for the reasons that are set out in the affidavit in support. No other claim, save and except this, shall be entertained by the Liquidator. The Liquidator to take up the claim for readjudication and communicate the decision thereof, as expeditiously as possible and within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J)