ANDHRA BANK Vs. OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Doubting the correctness of the statement of law contained in paragraph 76 of the judgment of this Court in Allahabad bank v. Canara Bank and Another, a division Bench of this Court has directed that the matter be placed before a Bench of three Judges. background FACT :

(2.) By a scheme of amalgamation approved by the High Court of Calcutta on or about 317.1984, the assets and properties of tobacco Division of Duncan Agro tndustries Limited were transferred to its subsidiary New Tobacco Limited ('the Company', for snort). The company had been obtaining and enjoying diverse credit facilities from the appellant-bank upon hypothecation of all goods, raw materials, stocks of tobacco including movable properties situated at Biccavolu in the State of andhra Pradesh.

(3.) The appellant herein on or about 15.9.1987 filed a suit in the Calcutta High court for recovery of Rs. 2,69,54,228.15 along with interest at the rate of 18.5% p. a. against the company. In the same year, an application for winding up of the said company was filed before the Company judge of the Calcutta High Court, which was marked as CP No. 621 of 1987. The appellant in the said suit filed an interlocutory application; whereupon the joint receivers were appointed for making inventory of hypothecated goods lying in the factories of the company at Agarpara in the State of West Bengal and Biccavolu. Upon such inventory having been made, the stock of tobacco lying in the godown at Guntur and biccavolu were ordered by a learned single Judge of the High Court to be sold by auction and the joint receivers were directed to keep separate accounts of the sale proceeds of the goods in the two godowns. The said sale was later on confirmed and the sale proceeds of Rs. 135 lacs was directed to be deposited in a fixed deposit with the appellant. The company was directed to be wound up by the learned company Judge by an order dated 25.11.1991 and an official liquidator was directed to take possession of the assets of the company. The said order dated 25.11.1991 was, however, stayed in view of a scheme for revival of the company which was approved; whereupon a committee of management was appointed by the Calcutta High Court which was directed to reopen and run the factories of the company both at Agarpara and Biccavolu. The said scheme of management, however, ultimately having failed, the assets and properties of the company were directed to be sold by an order dated 23.9.1993 as an ongoing concern. By reason of an order dated 12.10. 1993, the Company Judge directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs. 38 lacs to the official liquidator on an ad hoc basis for the purpose of disbursing salaries to the officers, staff and workers of the company before the ensuing Puja vacation.