LAWS(RAJ)-2013-5-346

SAHAYOG SILK MILLS PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHOR Vs. RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION, JAIPUR

Decided On May 14, 2013
Sahayog Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. And Anothor Appellant
V/S
Rajasthan State Industrial Development And Investment Corporation, Jaipur Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by two companies one M/s. Sahayog Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd., petitioner No.1 (hereinafter 'M/s. Silk Ltd.') and another apparently its sister concern M/s. Sahayog processors Pvt. Ltd., petitioner No.2, (hereinafter 'M/s. process Ltd.') with the prayer that the letter dated 17.09.2008, whereby the Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation (hereinafter 'RIICO') informed the petitioner No.1-M/s. Sahayog Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd.- that the sale letter dated 06.12.2007 for the assets of M/s R.K. Texcon (India) Ltd., Chittorgarh Road, Village Guwardi, Bhilwara (hereinafter 'M/s. Texcon Ltd.') had been cancelled and the earnest money of Rs.2 lakhs deposited forfeited, be quashed and set aside. It has also been prayed that the subsequent advertisement dated 05.08.2009 issued by the RIICO inter alia for sale of assets of M/s. Texcon Ltd. also be quashed and set aside and RIICO be directed to handover the possession of the assets (land, building, plant and machinery) of M/s. Texcon Ltd. to the petitioner after accepting the balance amount of Rs.56 lakhs.

(2.) The facts of the case are that RIICO invited bids for the sale of the assets of M/s. Texcon (India) Ltd. in its possession under Sec. X29 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 vide advertisement published in various newspapers including Dainik Bhaskar, Jaipur Edition, on 14.06.2007. The said advertisement inter alia provided that the purchaser/s of the assets of M/s. Texcon Ltd. would not be required to pay separately any outstanding dues to the State Government towards Electricity dues (including that of the electricity distribution companies), Commercial Tax, State Excise, PHED, Transport, Land & Building Tax, Industries etc. except IPI dues of the Corporation regarding land. The advertisement however provided that the more detailed terms and conditions for the sale of the assets of M/s. Texcon Ltd. could be obtained either from the concerned Regional Manger / Senior Regional Manager or from RIICO's website or from the Sr. Deputy General Manger (F&R), RIICO. A condition precedent for the participation in the bid was a deposit of Rs.2 lakhs in favour of RIICO payable at Jaipur as earnest money. The sale was to be on "as is where is basis".

(3.) The petitioner No.1, M/s. Silk Ltd., Interested in the purchase of the assets of M/s. Texcon Ltd., approached RIICO for purchasing the fixed assets (Land, Building and Plants) of M/s. Texcon Ltd. by a sealed bid offered Rs.35.51 lakhs after having deposited the requisite earnest money of Rs.2 lakhs on 16.07.2007. The sealed bid of M/s. Silk Ltd. and other eligible bidders was opened. There is no dispute that RIICO thereafter proceeded to negotiate raising the bid price amongst the eligible bidders who had made their bids. M/s. Silk Ltd. thereupon made an enhanced offer of Rs.58 lakhs for the purchase of the assets of M/s. Texcon Ltd. to be paid on cash down basis on the standard terms and conditions of RIICO. The case of the petitioner, M/s. Silk Ltd., is that it was specifically put to RIICO at the time of finalisation of petitioner's highest offer of Rs.58 lakhs for the purchase of assets of M/s. Texcon Ltd. as to whether it would be required to pay the dues of other Departments. It was submitted that however "nothing was revealed" to the company but it was assured that RIICO would revert at the earliest on the issue of "other dues".