K DHANALAKSHMI Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pending the review applications whereby the second respondent in OSA Nos.175 and 176 of 2009 has sought for the review of the order made by the Court in the said original side appeals setting aside the sale made by the Official Liquidator, the Counsel for the appellant/State filed a letter which was received from the Department of Industries and Commerce and also the Official Liquidator filed a report. Both the documents speak of further developments. In view of the same, the following order is passed.

(2.) Pursuant to the appointment of the Official Liquidator as the Liquidator of the company in liquidation, the property in question was brought for sale in C.A.No.662/2007. The auction sale was confirmed for Rs.3.40 Crores by an order dated 24.10.2008 in favour of the review petitioner one Smt.K.Dhanalakshmi and it also directed the Official Liquidator to hand over possession and the documents pertaining to the property and execute the necessary conveyance deeds jointly with the Department of Industries and Commerce, Government of Tamil Nadu, in favour of the said purchaser or her nominee. Not satisfied with that order, the Department of Industries and Commerce made appeals in OSA Nos.175 and 176 of 2007. On enquiry of the appeals, this Court set aside the sale. After that order was made, the present review applications were filed by the auction purchaser seeking review of the judgment of the Court in the said appeals.

(3.) While the matter stood thus, a communication was received by the Counsel for the appellant from the Department of Industries and Commerce, and following the same, the Official Liquidator has also filed a report. As could be seen from the report, claims were made before the Official Liquidator which were shown in paragraph 6 namely SIPCOT - Rs.1,41,34,785/- during 2003; TIIC - Rs.1,31,41,390.80 during 2009, Bank of Baroda - Rs.2,54,07,142.75 during June 2007 and CTO - Rs.71,773/-. Further, it is also brought to the notice of the Court that an order came to be passed by the Company Court in C.A.No.669/2009 on 24.6.2009. In compliance of the same, a meeting was convened on 30.6.2009, and a scheme of settlement was recorded wherein it is stated as follows: