THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Company Application No.1138 of 2009 in Company Application No.372 of 2005 in Company Petition No.35 of 1985 Dated:03rd March, 2010 Between: M/s.Bharat Alloys & Energy Limited ….Applicant AND M/s. A.P.Carbides Limited (In liquidation) rep. by its Official Liquidator, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and others. …Respondents **** THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Company Application No.1138 of 2009 in Company Application No.372 of 2005 in Company Petition No.35 of 1985 ORDER: This Company Application has been filed by the applicant seeking a direction to 5th respondent M.V.Ramana, H.No.25/72, Kondapet, Dhone, Kurnool District, not to obstruct flow of water through pipelines laid under the lands to an extent of Ac.4.40 cents in S.No.70/1A, 71/1B, 74/1, 78/2, 79/1, 82/1, 83/1A, 85/1, 86/1 and 87/1, 1/2 and 2/2 in Dinnedevarapadu Village. 2. The applicant is the auction purchaser in respect of certain extent of land. The 5th respondent is also an auction purchaser in respect of certain extent of land. It is the grievance of the applicant that the 5th respondent is causing obstruction to the flow of water through the pipelines laid under the lands to an extent of Ac.4.40 cents. 3. The Official Liquidator filed the report No.431/2009, dated 01.12.2009 stating that the assets of the wound-up company were put to sale on ‘as is where is whatever there is basis’ to the applicant as well as to the 5th respondent herein. As per Clause 8 of the terms and conditions of the sale, no complaint of any defect or default in the said assets or by reason of any error or fault in the description or by deficiency thereof or in the particulars thereof, shall be entertained and there shall be no claim of whatsoever kind in respect thereof. It is further stated in the report that the Official Liquidator is not empowered to direct the 5th respondent to allow free flow of water through the pipelines to the lands purchased by him and the dispute has to be settled either by the District Collector or Water Works Department, who have jurisdiction over the matter. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant and learned counsel appearing for the Official Liquidator. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that it is the responsibility of the Official Liquidator to see that the 5th respondent not to put any obstructions to the flow of water through the pipelines laid under the lands in an extent of Ac.4.40. 6. Once the property has been auctioned and various persons have purchased and obtained delivery and when one interferes with the flow of water, the other has to work out his remedy in a civil Court. 7. Accordingly, reserving the liberty to the applicant to work out his remedies before the civil Court, this Company Application is dismissed. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:03rd March, 2010. cs THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Company Application No.1138 of 2009 in Company Application No.372 of 2005 in Company Petition No.35 of 1985 Dated:03rd March, 2010