Batliboi Ltd vs M/S Mideast Integrated Steel Ltd on 2 November, 2022

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Batliboi Ltd vs M/S Mideast Integrated Steel Ltd on 2 November, 2022

Bench: Navin Chawla

               $~2 (company)
               *         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
               +         CO.PET. 337/1996
                         BATLIBOI LTD.                                     ..... Petitioner
                                            Through:      None

                                            versus

                         M/S MIDEAST INTEGRATED STEEL LTD.         ..... Respondent
                                       Through: Ms.Ruchi Sindhwani, SC for OL
                                                  with Ms.Megha Bharara, Adv.
                                                  Mr.Rajiv Nayar, Sr. Adv. with
                                                  Mr.Kawal Nain, Ms.Kavita and
                                                  Mr.Rohit, Advs. for the applicant
                                                  in CO.APPLs.635-37/2022
                                                  Mr.Rajiv Nayar, Sr. Adv. with
                                                  Mr.Manish     Shukla,     Mr.Rishi
                                                  Jindal, Ms.Jyoti Srivastava and
                                                  Mr.Arjun Mehta, Advs. for the
                                                  applicant   in   CO.APPLs.611-
                                                  12/2022 & 639/2022
                         CORAM:
                         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
                                       ORDER

% 02.11.2022 CO.APPLs. 612/2022, 636/2022 & 637/2022 (Exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

CO.APPL.639/2022

2. This is an application filed on behalf of the applicant (Ms. Shipra Singh) praying for condonation of 10 days' delay in filing the relevant documents in compliance with the order dated 13.10.2022.

3. Having considered the contents of the application, the same is Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHALOO BATRA Signing Date:04.11.2022 17:38:21 allowed and the delay is condoned.

4. The application stands disposed of.

CO.APPL. 611/2022 and CO.APPL. 635/2022

5. Co. Appl. 611/2022 has been filed by Ms.Shipra Singh, one of the promoters of the respondent-Company, while Co. Appl. 635/2022 has been filed by the ex-management of the respondent-Company seeking refund of Rs.95 lakhs and Rs.1.05 crores respectively lying deposited with this Court in Fixed Deposits.

6. Pursuant to the orders dated 20.01.2005 and 25.04.2005, passed in the Company Petition, an amount of Rs.95 lakhs and Rs.1.05 crores were deposited by the propounders of the Scheme, out of which, vide order dated 25.04.2005, an amount of Rs.1.05 crores was directed to be kept in a Fixed Deposit. The amount of Rs.95 lakhs, which was deposited, also remained in a Fixed Deposit with the Registry of this Court.

7. The Scheme propounded by the ex-management of the respondent Company was sanctioned by this Court vide its order dated 01.08.2012. In the said order it is further recorded that while all the secured creditors stood paid, five unsecured creditors remained to be paid by the Company. A provision was, therefore, made in the said order for their protection as well, with a direction that the amount lying with the Official Liquidator (in short, 'OL') be refunded to the Company to be kept in a Fixed Deposit with the Company for any eventual claim being made by those unsecured creditors.

8. The learned senior counsel for the applicants submits that the Scheme has worked itself out and the Company stands revived with no Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHALOO BATRA Signing Date:04.11.2022 17:38:21 claims being made qua the Scheme creditors.

9. He further submits that though CO.APPL.611/2022 has been filed in the name of 'Ms. Shipra Singh', he has no objection if the amount lying with this Court is refunded in the name of the Company itself. Similar prayer is made by the learned counsel appearing in CO.APPL.635/2022.

10. As the Scheme was approved way back on 01.08.2012, and as per the submissions of the learned counsels for the applicants, no other petition is pending before this Court nor are there any orders qua the amount lying deposited with this Court, passed by any court or tribunal, in any manner restraining their refund to the Company itself, I see no impediment in acceding to the prayer made by the learned counsels for the applicants.

11. Accordingly, it is directed that the Registry shall refund the maturity amount of the Fixed Deposits qua the amount of Rs.95 lakhs and Rs.1.05 crores lying with the Registry of this Court in the present Company Petition to the respondent-Company, subject to the respondent- Company giving an undertaking/indemnity in favour of the Registrar of this Court to the effect that in case any claim is made against the said amount by any third party, the same shall be refunded subject to orders of this Court.

12. The applications are disposed of in the above terms.

13. Dasti.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J NOVEMBER 02, 2022/s Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHALOO BATRA Signing Date:04.11.2022 17:38:21

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders