1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Company Application (CAO) No. 719 of 2010 in Company Application No. 364/2010 in Company Application NO. 7 of 2005 with O.L.R. NO. 59 of 2004 in Company Petition NO. 9 of 1991. Official Liquidator & Liquidator of M/s Nagpur Transformers Ltd. ..VERSUS.. Mr. Ashim Marumdar and others Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Miss Sanchi Jaiswal, Adv. h/f Dr. Anjan De, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. A.R.Atre, Advocate for Respondent no.5 CORAM : Prasanna B. Varale, JJ. DATED : 27 th August, 2010 . This is an application moved by the applicant – Official Liquidator seeking recall of the order dated 09/4/2010, passed by this Court. This Court, by order dated 09/4/2010, had permitted the applicant to serve respondent no.3 by paper publication in daily ‘Hindustan Times’. The present application is moved on the ground that by the subsequent order dated 21/4/2010, passed by this Court, the applicant was permitted to take necessary steps such as calling quotations for the purposes of paper publication. The applicant submits that after receiving the quotations, the applicant found that the charges quoted by the newspaper ‘Hindustan Times’ are at higher side, ranging from Rs.2,81,483/- to Rs.3,89,952/-, whereas the funds available with the company are limited i.e. Rs.2,90,674/-. The applicant/Official Liquidator has filed on record Pursis Stamp No. 7810 of 2010. By this pursis, the applicant/Official Liquidator has submitted that he has received a quotation from the 2 publication ‘The Statesman, New Delhi’ and the charges quoted by said publication are at lower side i.e. Rs.7,357/-. The said pursis is taken on record and marked as “X1” for identification. The applicant/Official Liquidator has filed another pursis Stamp No. 7996/2010 dated 28/7/2010. By this pursis, the correct address of respondent no.3, as per the information of the applicant, is furnished. The said pursis is taken on record and marked as “X2” for identification. Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that in view of the subsequent developments such as the rates quoted by the publication “The Statesman, New Delhi”, which are at lower side and meets the financial requirement of the applicant, limited modification in the order dated 09/4/2010 is prayed to the effect that the applicant to serve respondent no.3 by paper publication in daily “The Statesman, New Delhi” instead of daily “Hindustan Times”. In view of the submissions made by the learned Advocate for the applicant and for the reasons stated in the pursis dated 23/7/2010, the order dated 09/4/2010 is modified as follows : The application is moved by the applicant to serve respondent no.3 by paper publication in the daily “The Statesman, New Delhi”, instead of daily “Hindustan Times”. In view of the above mentioned facts, needless to say that the time which was granted to the applicant by order dated 09/4/2010 is also required to be extended and accordingly the applicant is permitted to serve the respondent no.3 through paper publication by depositing necessary charges, by extending the time till 24/9/2010. The application is allowed in aforesaid terms. JUDGE 3 Diwale