The submission is, by introducing into the sale of the factory as a going companycern has in fact, nullified the execution itself.
On the 26th August, 1997 the appellant bank applied for execution of decree for the aforesaid amount along with interest.
Thereafter the High Court through its order dated 23rd February, 1998 directed the Official Liquidator to publish an advertisement inviting offers for sale of the assets of the companypany in liquidation as a going companycern.
The relevant portion of this order is also quoted hereunder The Official Liquidator is directed to appoint a Valuer in terms of the order dated 12th December, 1997 passed by this Court.
On these facts the appellant bank has filed these appeals against two orders dated 23rd February, 1998 and 10th July, 1998.
The relevant portion of this order is also quoted hereunder In the order for the sale on the application of the secured creditor Allahabad Bank, the same must be limited to its security and the order dated 12.12.97 is modified to the above extentAt the time of settling the above sale, the question as to whether the suit of the companypany can be sold as a going companycern shall be companysidered.
The relevant portion of this order is quoted hereunder The Official Liquidator is appointed Receiver for the purpose of making an inventory of the assets of the Company liquidation in liquidation and have the same valued by a qualified Valuer for the purpose of sale of the said assets.
The companyditions for such sale shall be settled by him subject to companyfirmation by this Court.
The decree provided payment of decretal amount in 60 equal monthly installments on and from 12th September, 1996 in default the petitioner was entitled to sale the suit properties by public auction or private companytract.
On 15th July, 1996 a decree was passed by the Calcutta High Court for Rs.3,47,94,232.85 together with interest.
On 12th December, 1997 the High Court appointed the Official Liquidator in the said execution case, to take possession of the assets of the companypany and directed it to take steps for the sale of the assets of this companypany.
In order to appreciate the companytroversy we are hereunder giving short essential facts.
On 19th December, 1990 the appellant bank filed a suit against the said companypany represented by the Official Liquidator in the High Court for a decree for Rs.4,06,90,548/ together with interest.
It is relevant to refer that the aforesaid judgment debtor company went into liquidation under the order of the winding up dated 4th June, 1990.
On 19th December, 1997 this order was modified by directing that order for sale must be limited to the security of Allahabad bank, which has been plant, machinery and other moveable assets as mentioned in the schedule to the decree.
The appellant Allahabad bank the decree holder is a secured creditor of Rishra Steels Limited respondent number4 the judgment debtor.
Misra, J. Leave granted.
LITTTTTTTJ The appellant Allahabad bank the decree holder has raised a question, whether after an order passed in execution proceedings for the sale of plant, machinery and moveable lying at the factory, can the same companyrt later pass an order for sale of the factory of the companypany as a going companycern.
