Jharkhand High Court
Rajeev Sachdeva vs Ms Rajhans Steel Ltd Through Official ... on 22 March, 2013
Author: Prakash Tatia
Bench: Chief Justice, P.P.Bhatt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Company Appeal No. 1 of 2013
Rajeev Sachdeva Vs. M/s. Rajhans Steel Ltd. & Ano.
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.P.BHATT
For the Appellant/Petitioner : Mr.Ashok Kumar Sinha
For the Official Liquidator : M/s.H.K.Mehta, M.Patra
For the Respondent No.2 : Mr. A.K.Das
Order No.3 Dated 22
nd March, 2013
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. After hearing at length, we are of the considered opinion that Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.L.P (C) No.27210/2010, vide order dated 4th October, 2010, directed the BIFR to decide whether the creditors of the company have been paid off and if so, whether the rehabilitation pacakage proposed by the appellant is viable. The BIFR was directed to consider and decide the matter expeditiously preferably with three months from the date of that order, i.e. 4th October, 2010. Even after passing off more than 2½ years, the matter has not been decided by the BIFR.
3. During this period, some orders were passed and challenged in Company Petition as well as in Company Appeal No.1/12 and the Company Appeal was decided on 29th August, 2012 by this Court and thereafter AIFR passed the order in one of the matters on 27th September, 2012. Thereafter BIFR passed the order on 5.12.2012 (in Case No.164/1989). It appears that during this period, when revival proposal submitted by the Company is under consideration, the Company Director/Company is seeking possession of the property from the Official Liquidator and the appellant has relied upon certain observations made in the order dated 5th December, 2012 (Annexure
- 15).
4. When the company revival is under consideration and yet has not been accepted or reasons have not been recorded as to for what purpose a company can be given possession of the property, we are of the considered opinion that we may remind the BIFR that Hon'ble Supreme Court has already directed the BIFR to decide the matter expeditiously, vide order dated 4th October, 2010. Therefore, we would like to know the BIFR's decision on the appellant's proposal submitted for revival of the company. A copy of this order be sent to the Board For Industrial And Financial Reconstruction (BIFR), Bench Office - II, New Delhi. Copy of this order shall also be placed before the BIFR by the appellant. The progress may be submitted or what steps have been taken may be shown by the appellant by submitting certified copy of the ordersheets.
Put up this case on 1.5.2013.
(Prakash Tatia, C.J.) (P.P.Bhatt,J.) dey