SHIVASHAKTI BUILDERS AND FINANCIAL COMPANY LIMITED Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Re: O.L. Report dated 2.12.2008 at Flag 19, LA. No. 2462/2009 and S.A., at Flags 21 and 21/A:

(2.) By the report dated 2.12.2008 the Official Liquidator had, inter alia, pointed out that during the discussion with the Circle Officer, Gaya it came to the notice of the Official Liquidator that M/s Shivshakti Builders & Financial Company Limited, the company in liquidation, had transferred the land appertaining to Khata No. 191, Plot No. 1053 area 0.77 acres to one Shri Om Prakash who, in turn, transferred the same to Shri Rakesh Verma and Shri Rajesh Verma, the Applicants, by different sale deeds and accordingly it was prayed that notices may be issued to the holders of Khata No. 191 to produce the respective sale deeds before the Court at the earliest to ascertain the transfer date in order to safeguard the interest of the company in liquidation.

(3.) On the basis of the aforesaid report, by order dated 9.1.2009 notices were issued to Rajesh Verma and Rakesh Verma to produce their respective sale deeds before this Court at the earliest for due consideration and verification by this Court regarding the date of registration of the same. Pursuant to the notice, Rajesh Verma and Rakesh Verma appeared and filed LA. No. 2462/2009. From perusal of the same, it transpired that they are subsequent purchasers of the land of the company from Surjeet Singh, Charanjeet Singh, both sons of Sri Prakash Singh, Sri Prakash Singh, son of Sri Hanuman Singh and Sri Om Prakash Singh, son of Sri Govind Singh, who had purchased the said land on 19.5.1998 after the winding up petition was filed and the Official Liquidator had been appointed as the Provisional Liquidator. Therefore, by order dated 3.7.2009 notices were issued to the aforesaid original purchasers also to show cause, as to why the sale deed executed in their favour with respect to the aforesaid land which was transferred after the presentation of winding up petition and appointment of Provisional Liquidator be not declared null and void ab initio. Despite valid service of notices upon them, the four original purchasers have not turned up before this Court. Accordingly, the matter is being taken up ex parte against them.