- 1 - VPH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY APPLICATION No. 196 OF 2009 IN COMPANY PETITION NO. 735 OF 1997 Shweta Print Pack Pvt. Ltd. ... Applicant Vs The Official Liquidator of Reacto Papers India Ltd. (in Liqn.) ... Respondents *** Mr. Harinder Toor a/w Mr. L. R. Castelino, for the Applicant. Mr. Apporva Kaiwar, for the Official Liquidator. Mr. P. P. Chawan i/b Navdeep Vora & Cos. for MIDC. *** CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATED : JULY 12, 2010. P.C. : 1. The applicant has sought an order, directing respondent No.1, the Official Liquidator to hand over possession of the premises, being land and the buildings, situate at Plot No. H/3-5, Nashik, and to - 2 - remove the machinery stored there. 2. Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation is the owner of the property. It had agreed to lease the same to one Nandanvan Machine Tools Pvt. Ltd. for a period of 99 years on the terms and conditions, contained in a document dated 4th December 1991. 3. An agreement dated 2nd September 1994 was entered into between Nandanvan Machine Tools Pvt. Ltd. and the Respondent company-Reacto Papers India Ltd. The agreement recites that a consideration of Rs.50,000/- was paid by Reacto Papers India Ltd., and that the balance consideration was to be paid in the installments, stated therein. A prospectus issued by Reacto Papers India Ltd. states that the entire consideration has been paid. It is not necessary to express any view in that regard at this stage. 4. The above Company Petition was filed in September 1997. On 6th December 1998 the Official Liquidator was appointed as a provisional liquidator. On 12th March, 1999 the provisional liquidator took possession of the said property. - 3 - 5. One of the directors filed a statement of affairs, as per Schedule IV of the Companies Act, 1956, on 2nd September, 2004. The said statement does not refer to the said property. 6. The applicant’s case is that a tripartite agreement dated 2nd July, 2008 was entered into between Nandanvan Machine Tools Pvt. Ltd., MIDC and itself for the sale of the said property to it. The present application is made on the basis of this agreement. 7. It is not possible in the Company Application to decide the rival claims between the company which is sought to be wound-up and the Applicant. In any event it is not possible for this Court to put the applicant in possession of the said property. It is undoubtedly a valuable property and it is necessary for the Official Liquidator to adopt appropriate proceedings to take steps to enforce the rights of Reacto India papers Ltd., in respect of the said property. 8. The Company has not been wound up as yet. The Applicant was never put in possession of the said property. It could not be put in possession, as the Official Liquidator was already in possession. - 4 - 9. In the circumstances, the ends of justice would be served by directing the Official Liquidator to remain in possession of the said property and maintain status-quo in respect thereof. The Official Liquidator shall file a report within 4 weeks, and even otherwise take steps to enforce the rights of the company in respect of the said property under the said agreement dated 2nd September 1994 or otherwise. . The Company Application is accordingly disposed of.