LAWS(DLH)-2002-7-76

ELECTRINICS LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On July 24, 2002
ELECTRONICS LIMITED Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed on behalf of fifty-two persons who are ex-wor kmen/ex-officers of the Company praying that they be impleaded as a party to the liquidation proceedings and be heard therein. The application, which has been filed on 5.3.2001, has been moved through Shri Rakesh Tiku, Advocate. From a perusal of the file it is evident that all these persons have already been heard. Application is accordingly allowed. Fifty-two persons whose names ajre contained in Annexure 'A' shall be deemed to be the parties to the present proceedings. Keeping in view the stage at which the present petition is, filing of fresh Memo of Parties etc. is dismissed.

(2.) M/s. Electronics India (In Liquidation) was ordered to be wound-up in terms of Order dated 20.5.1998 passed by Anil Dev Singh, J.

(3.) CA 450/2001 was filed in March, 2001 under Rule 9 of the Company Court Rules praying for' the maintenance of status quo in respect of several quarters in the occupation of sundry ex-employees of M/s. Electronics Ltd.(in Liquidation). Possession of some of the other premises of the Company was taken over by the Official Liquidator as is evident from the Order passed on 7.7.1999 in CA No. 811/1999. Thereafter by Orders dated 18.4.2000, the property, land, building, plant and machinery of the Company was ordered to be put up for sale. The Reserve Price was fixed at Rs.6,47,17,600/- (Rs. six crore forty seven lakh seventeen thousand and six hundred only) in consonance with the valuation made by the Union Bank of India, and concurred with by the Official Liquidator. It will be relevant to mention that Mr. Ramamurti had entered appearance on behalf of the workers Union and Mr. Sanjay Parikh with Mr. Ramamurti had entered appearance on behalf of the Electronics Kamgar Union. The present applicants must therefore be deemed to have knowledge of the proceedings in this Court. In any event, it is not their case that they had no knowledge prior to the filing of the present application.