AWADHESH PRASAD SINHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Siddharth Prasad, learned Counsel for the appellant, Mr. Kumar Abhimanyu Pratap, learned Counsel for the Bihar State Credit and Investment Corporation Limited (for short, 'the BICICO') and Mr. Sunil Kumar Sharma, learned Counsel for respondent no. 5.

(2.) The present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the appellant challenging the order, dated 10.01.2017, passed in CWJC No.2930 of 2015.

(3.) The undisputed facts of the case are that the appellant was the Managing Director of M/s Kiran Re-rollers Private Limited, Nalanda (in short, 'the Company'), which was duly incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956. The Company had taken financial assistance from the BICICO to the tune of Rs. 90,00,000/- during the period 1989-90. The Company failed to refund the loan taken from the BICICO in terms of the agreement entered into between the parties. On 17.05.2011, the BICICO issued demand notice to the Company and its Directors, including the appellant, under the provisions of Sections 29 and 30 of the State Finance Corporation Act, 1951, highlighting the outstanding against the Company on 31.03.2011 and called upon the Company and its Directors to clear the dues of the BICICO within a period of 21 days, failing which the assets of the Company will be auction sold. Since the Company and its Directors failed to clear all the dues of the BICICO within the aforesaid period, the BICICO issued letter, dated 03.06.2011, for taking over the possession of the assets of the Company. Thereafter, it published the auction sale notice on 10.06.2011 for sale of the assets of the Company. The Company, through its Managing Director (appellant), moved before this Court and filed CWJC No. 9994 of 2011 against the aforesaid letter and auction sale notice and also for a direction to the BICICO to accept One- Time Settlement proposal submitted by the Company for discharge of its liabilities. The said writ application was dismissed vide order, dated 30.06.2011, by this Court. Being aggrieved by the order, dated 30.06.2011, passed in CWJC No. 9994 of 2011, the Company, through its Managing Director (appellant), filed Letters Patent Appeal, vide L.P.A. No. 1244 of 2011 before this Court. On 06.03.2012, a Division Bench of this Court dismissed L.P.A. No. 1244 of 2011. After dismissal of the Letters Patent Appeal, since the BICICO had failed to execute and register sale deed of the assets of the Company bought by respondent no. 5, the respondent no. 5 filed a writ petition before this Court, vide CWJC No. 2930 of 2015, wherein a prayer was made to direct the BICICO to execute and register the sale deed of the property bought by him in the auction sale. In the said writ petition, the appellant filed an interlocutory application, vide I. A. No. 5341 of 2015, praying therein that he is the original promoter of the property in question and, hence, he may be impleaded as one of the respondents in the writ petition. His interlocutory application was allowed by the learned Single Judge. He contested the writ petition and, upon contest, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the BICICO to execute and register the deed of sale for the premises in question within three weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order, vide impugned judgment, dated 10.01.2017.