1 IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY APPLICATION NO.1014 OF 2007 IN COMPANY PETITION NO.613 OF 1984 M/s.Kay Kay Trading Company. ..Petitioner And Yasmeen Lukmani & Ors. ..Applicants. V/s. The Official Liquidator & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr.M. Taly with Ms. Shamima Taly, Shaikh Yusuf Ali and Rahul Pujari i/b. S.Mahomedbhai & Co. for applicants. Mr.Prashant Beri i/b. Beri & Co. for respondent No.12. Ms.Smita Ranpise i/b. S.K.Srivastav & Co. for respondent Nos. 3,4,5A-5D. Mr.Birendra Saraf with Ms.Meenakshi Mhapankar i/b. Mr.V.Deshpande for respondent No.8. Mr.J.P.Sen i/b. Leena B. Lokare for respondent No.15. Mr. N.M.Ganguli for Respondent Nos. 13. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J A.M.KHANWILKAR,J A.M.KHANWILKAR,J DATE DATE DATE : OCTOBER 23, 2008. : OCTOBER 23, 2008. : OCTOBER 23, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : 1. Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. It is not in dispute that the Company Judge has ordered that the Respondent company M/s. Dynacraft Machines Co. Ltd. be wound up. The 2 Official Liquidator has taken over possession of all the assets. In addition, the Official Liquidator has been appointed by the Company Court who is expected to take all necessary steps to take the order of winding up to its logical end by disposing of the assets of the company in liquidation and adjudicate the claim of the creditors and other stakeholders as well as to disburse sale proceed in the ratio keeping in mind priority specified under section 529A of the Companies Act. The applicants before this Court claim that they are shareholders having over 40% share. The apprehension of the Applicants is that the sale of assets of the company in liquidation will proceed in such a way which will benefit only some of the creditors and not for the benefit of all stakeholders. 3. Insofar as this grievance is concerned, the representative of the Official Liquidator submits that the same is misplaced since the Official Liquidator before proceeding with the sale of the assets has already initiated process of demarcation of the respective assets of the company in liquidation. If the demarcation process is completed, further steps will be taken by the Official Liquidator to conduct public auction in respect of the assets of the company in liquidation, 3 so as to derive best prevailing market price of the property in question. The assurance given by the Official Liquidator through his representative is accepted. In view of that assurance, nothing survives for consideration with regard to the apprehension of the Applicants that the assets will be sold on unfavourable condition at depressed value to benefit only some of the creditors. 4. The other grievance made by the Applicant is about the fact that Bank of India-Respondent No.6 who is one of the Creditor was partly secured creditor and partly unsecured creditor in respect of its claim amount, has assigned the said claim to third party who is not banker and is likely to deal with the property to defeat the claim of other stakeholders in the Company. It is necessary to examine this controversy at this stage. At the appropriate stage all aspects in that behalf can be considered in the first place by the Official Liquidator while adjudicating the claim of the Respondent No.6-Bank of India or assignee of the Respondent No.6 namely Respondent No.15. All questions in that behalf are left open. 5. It was brought to my notice that Court Receiver has been appointed in proceedings instituted 4 by one of the Respondent No.8 before the DRT and that the Court Receiver is in possession of the assets of the company in liquidation. It is not in dispute that the order of winding up has been allowed to become final. Besides, the Order passed by the Company Judge calling upon the Official Liquidator to take over the assets of the company in liquidation has also become final. In fact the said direction was challenged by way of appeal by the workers union, which came to be rejected. In other words, the order issued by the Company Judge directing sale of all the assets of the company in liquidation has been allowed to become final for which reason it will have to be take to its logical end until Court of competent jurisdiction directs to the contrary. 6. In the circumstances, this Application is disposed of on accepting assurance given by the Official Liquidator that process of demarcation of assets of the company in liquidation will be completed expeditiously, in any case not later than 30th November, 2008. In case, the Official Liquidator encounters any difficulty in completing the sale process will be free to submit report so as to seek appropriate direction, as may be advised, after the demarcation process is completed. The Official Liquidator will take further steps to 5 advertise public auction of the assets of the company in liquidation. The Official Liquidator shall submit necessary report in that behalf at the earliest opportunity. 7. Application disposed of on the above terms. (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J)