GANAPATI COMMERCE LTD Vs. RECOVERY OFFICER DRT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A question of some significance as to the authority, and obligation, of the company Court arises in these matters. The official liquidator as custodian of the assets of the three companies in liquidation has applied for a common order passed by the Recovery officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal - II, Delhi to be set aside. The only contesting respondent in the three applications, a secured creditor at whose behest the company in each case was directed to be wound up, resists the prayers primarily on the ground of lack of the company Court's jurisdiction to interfere with an order passed by a recovery officer under the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993.

(2.) THERE may be a few dates that may be different in the three matters taken up together and there may be some irrelevant details which may be at variance in the three cases, but the principal matter in issue is the same and such issue does not stand on or fall by the varying dates or minor factual discrepancies in the three matters.

(3.) BANK of Rajasthan limited is a secured creditor of each of the three companies in liquidation. Such bank instituted proceedings under sections 433, 434 and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956 for winding up each of the three companies. The three companies were wound up at the bank's behest. Most of the assets of the three companies have been sold off by the official liquidator through Court. The official liquidator holds the sales proceeds for the same to be applied upon creditors dues' being ascertained and priorities assessed. The official liquidator complains of a common order made by the recovery officer by which the official liquidator has been required to transmit the sale proceeds to the recovery officer of the appropriate Debts Recovery Tribunal.