Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: itcot in Glencore Grain Rotterdam B.V. vs M/S Shivnath Rai Harnarain (India) ... on 25 May, 2011Matching Fragments
1. Issue notice. Notice is accepted on behalf of the decree holder by Mr.Vidhur Bhatia. Counsel for the decree holder has opposed this application without filing the reply.
2. I have heard learned senior counsel for the parties and proceed to dispose of this application.
3. The present application has been filed by the judgment debtor No. 2 to seek a direction to ITCOT Consultancy and Services Limited (hereinafter referred to as ITCOT) to furnish a copy of the valuation report prepared by it, and to grant leave to the applicant to file objections to the said valuation report. A further direction is sought to ITCOT to keep in abeyance the public auction proposed to be held in terms of the public notice issued by it for sale of shares of judgment debtors No. 2 & 3 held in judgment debtor No. 5 company.
5. This order was challenged by the judgment debtors in appeal, being EFA(OS) No. 15/2010. The said appeal was dismissed by the Division Bench vide order dated 11.06.2010. Consequently, the order dated 19.04.2010 has attained finality. Subsequently, SBI Capital Markets Limited was substituted by ITCOT vide order dated 22.02.2011. The said order, inter alia, states as follows:
"I, therefore, appoint ITCOT Consultancy and Services Limited 50-A, Greames Road, Murugesan Naicker Complex, Chennai-600006 Ph.# 044-28290324, 42936800 Fax # 044-28293512 as the firm to undertake valuation of the shares held by JD No. 2 & 3 in JD No. 5 and after valuing the shares to sell the shares. The work shall be split in two parts. The first part shall be the valuation of the shares and second part shall be selling of the shares. JDs shall provide all necessary information to the above said broker for valuation of the shares and shall cause no hindrance. The aforesaid company shall complete the valuation work as early as possible, in all probabilities within 60 days. The initial charges for the first part of the work shall be borne by the decree holder to be recovered from JDs as a part of the decreetal amount. The final fee for the work shall also be recovered by the DH as a part of the decree. The sale of shares shall be undertaken within 30 days after valuation of the shares. The agent shall give its report after completion of entire work to the Court. The money so realized shall be kept by agent in a nationalized bank and the same shall be utilized in satisfaction of decree and in payment of fees of the agent. Any hindrance caused by the JDs in the work of the agent shall be viewed seriously." (emphasis supplied)
8. The submission of the learned senior counsel for the judgment debtor No. 2/applicant firstly is that the judgment debtors have not been provided with a copy of the valuation report prepared by ITCOT.
The judgment debtors do not know on what basis the said valuation has been done.
9. I may note that the court had not directed ITCOT to supply a copy of its valuation report to either the decree holder, or the judgment debtors. The bid document, which is publicly available on the website of ITCOT, and also specifically given to the judgment debtor No. 5 vide ITCOT communication dated 12.05.2011 gives the "Executive Summary of Valuation Report". The said report takes note of the following facts:
Value of shares held by JD2 and JD3 were arrived and the same was also put under validation of market price of similar sized peer companies and validated."
11. From the aforesaid, it is evident that though the detailed valuation report has not been supplied by ITCOT to the judgment debtors or the decree holder, the factors considered by ITCOT, and the methodology adopted by it for arriving at its valuation has been sufficiently disclosed. The reserve price has been fixed by ITCOT on the basis of its valuation. Therefore, I find no merit in the grievance raised by the judgment debtor applicant with regard to non-supply of the valuation report prepared by ITCOT.