THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Company Appeal No.13 of 2011 19th September, 2011 Between :- Jujjavarapu Venkata Rayudu .. Appellant And M/s.Coastal Chemicals Ltd (in Liqn) Rep.by the Official Liquidator, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad .. Respondent THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Company Appeal No.13 of 2011 ORDER:- This Company Appeal has been directed against the order dated 18-4-2011 passed by the Official Liquidator on a claim filed by the appellant. The appellant submitted the claim before the Official Liquidator. The Official Liquidator adjudicated the claim of the appellant as an unsecured creditor. Assailing the order of adjudication treating the appellant as an unsecured creditor, this appeal has been filed. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned Counsel appearing for the Official Liquidator. By an order dated 24-10-2000 made in R.C.C.No.6 of 2000, this Court appointed the Official Liquidator as a Provisional Liquidator of M/s.The Coastal Chemical Ltd. Subsequently, an order of winding up of M/s.The Coastal Chemical Ltd., came to be passed on 27-12-2000 and the Official Liquidator attached to this Court came to be appointed as its Liquidator. The Official Liquidator called for the claims against the Company (in Liqn). The appellant submitted a claim before the Official Liquidator stating that S.Venkata Ratnam, Ex-Managing Director of the Company (in Liqn) borrowed Rs.6,00,000/- on a promissory note. The appellant claims the status of secured creditor. The Official Liquidator rejected the plea of the appellant and treated the claim of the appellant as unsecured debt. Indisputably, the appellant has not placed any material on record to show that any property of the Company (in Liqn) has been offered as security for the loan availed from him. Even the charge against the properties of the Company in respect of the loan availed from the appellant has not been registered with the Registrar of Companies. When such is the situation, the Official Liquidator is justified in admitting the claim of the appellant as unsecured debt. The order impugned in the appeal does not warrant any interference. Accordingly, the Company Appeal is dismissed. No costs. ________________________ B.Seshasayana Reddy, J 19th September, 2011 smr