Punjab-Haryana High Court
M/S Jct Electronics Ltd., A-32, Indl. ... vs - on 20 May, 2019
CA 184-2018 in CA 1-2018 and connected cases 1
103+102+6
CA 184-2018 in CA 1-2018 in CP 217-2018
CA 176-2018 in CA 74-2018
CA 321-2016 in CP 217-2015
CA 80-2018
In the matter of: M/S JCT ELECTRONICS LTD.
Present: Mr. V.K. Sachdeva, Advocate for ARCIL.
Ms. Manisha Luvkumar, Senior Advocate/Govt. Pleader
with Ms. Maitaili D. Mehta, Assistant Govt. Pleader with
Mr. Sahil Sharma, Advocate
for the State of Gujarat.
Mr. Manish Jain, Advocate for SASF
Mr. Ashwani Chopra, Senior Advocate with
Mr.Mayur Kanwar, Advocate and
Mr.Ankit Midha, Advocate for the auction purchaser
Mr. Deepak Aggarwal, Advocate with
Mr. O.P. Sharma, Official Liquidator.
Mr.B.S.Patwalia, Advocate for the applicant
in CA 321-2016.
Mr.Gaurav Tangri, Advocate for
Mr.Sanjay Tangri, Advocate
for respondents No.31 and 32 in CA-321-2016
****
CA-184-2018
1. A cumulative reading of the events leading up to the permission of sale of the property of the company in liquidation in the State of Gujarat vide order dated 02.12.2017 passed by this Court and the correspondence exchanged between ARCIL and the auction purchaser, after confirmation of sale vide order dated 08.03.2018, with special reference to letter dated 23.03.2018 (Annex 12 at pp.54 of CA- 184-2018) and other relevant link correspondence i.e. Annex A-24, A-
1 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 10-06-2019 08:03:33 ::: CA 184-2018 in CA 1-2018 and connected cases 2 26, A-29, A-32 & A-33 with CA 75-2018 by the auction purchaser and the letter of Mamlatdar dated 05.04.2018 annexed as Annex A-16 with CA 74-2018; manifestly suggests that the supervening events as have transpired have completely and materially altered the contractual relations between the parties as they existed on 08.03.2018. The factual position obtaining confirms that auction property will remain encumbered with charges thereupon, making it no longer worthwhile for the auction purchaser to go ahead with the deal indefinitely with substantial money blocked. Therefore, it would be just and equitable to relieve the auction purchaser from the auction process leading up to the sale of property, and to direct ARCIL to refund of the part sale consideration received by them from the auction purchaser on 18.10.2017 and 15.12.2017 with interest accruing thereon at the agreed rate of 10% per annum within a period of 30 days from the date of supply of the certified copy of this order.
2. The Official Liquidator will be at liberty to make legitimate claims for the administrative and legal expenses borne by the Official Liquidator from ARCIL incurred in the auction process. The Official Liquidator may submit his calculations to ARCIL within a month for payment and the amount due, subject to verification, be disbursed within reasonable time.
3. Any action or decision taken by the Official Liquidator for forfeiting the money deposited shall stand invalidated in view of this order.
2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 10-06-2019 08:03:33 ::: CA 184-2018 in CA 1-2018 and connected cases 3
4. Accordingly, CA No.79-80 of 2018 filed by the Official Liquidator stands dismissed.
5. The other issues remaining alive after exeunt of the auction purchaser from the auction proceedings as existing between ARCIL, SASF, State of Gujarat and the Official Liquidator are left open for determination on the next date of hearing or thereafter.
6. Learned counsel for ARCIL contends that ARCIL will be within its legal rights to act against the auction purchaser in line with the terms and conditions of the auction notice and in the light of the provisions of Rule 9 (5) of the rules framed under The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 for effecting the forfeiture showing default in making the balance payment of the sale consideration.
7. Without expressing any opinion on this contention and of the fact that the sale was initiated at the instance of ARCIL by the Company Court the disputes, if any, between ARCIL and the auction purchaser can be considered by the appropriate Forum without prejudice to the rights of parties.
8. In view of the above, CA stands allowed.
9. Mr.Sachdeva has handed over a synopsis of ARCIL's case stated in court today which is made part of the record. CA-176-2018 in CA-74-2018
1. CA is allowed as prayed for. Written submissions tendered on behalf of applicant-ARCIL are taken on record. CA-321-2016 in CP-217-2015 3 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 10-06-2019 08:03:33 ::: CA 184-2018 in CA 1-2018 and connected cases 4
1. List on 31.07.2019.
2. A photocopy of the order be placed on the files of other connected cases.
20.05.2019 (RAJIV NARAIN RAINA)
neenu/Vimal JUDGE
4 of 4
::: Downloaded on - 10-06-2019 08:03:33 :::