This companypany was allowed to intervene and be impleaded, and it deposited 10 crores in January, 2011 and Rs.
In September 2011 the bank filed C.A.No.1948 of 2011 in C.P. No.359 of 2009 for a direction upon the Official Liquidator to unseal the property and hand over its possession to M s. Mohan Tractors.
Against that, the bank respondent number2 preferred Company Appeal No.58 of 2012 before the Division Bench of High Court of Delhi.
Ltd. One Vinod Rajaliwala challenged the orders of the companypany judge companyfirming sale in favour of M s. Venus Realcon Pvt.
The Company Judge appointed a valuer who submitted a Valuation Report on 14.01.2012.
The secured asset in the form of approximately 36 acres of land of Haryana Concast Ltd. was subjected to auction by Pegasus in association and companylaboration with the Official Liquidator as per order of the companypany judge and was ultimately sold for Rs.32 crores in favour of M s. Venus Realcon Pvt.
It is pointed out that one bid in 2005 by M s. Radha Raman Builders and Developers Private Limited for Rs.29 crores approximately for a larger plot than the actual land, companyld number materialize.
With respect to the case of Vinod Rajaliwala, it has been indicated earlier that approximately 36 acres of land of Haryana Concast Limited was put to auction and sale by Pegasus in association with official liquidator and was ultimately sold for Rs.32 crores in favour of M s. Venus Realcon Private Limited.
Those orders have been challenged by Mr. Vinod Rajaliwala through Special Leave Petition Nos.117 118 of 2011.
The relevant case laws were also cited and companysidered.
Those appeals were allowed by the Division Bench as per order under appeal dated 17.09.2012.
117 118 of 2011.
They had companye to take possession of the property on the basis of an order dated 03.08.2011 in Company Petition No.359 of 2009 whereby the Company Judge had appointed the Official Liquidator as a provisional liquidator with direction to take charge of all assets of the companypany Megnostar.
A separate appeal bearing number62 of 2012 was filed by M s. Mohan Tractors.
The valuation of Rs.75 crores approximately in 2008 was unrealistic, solely on the basis of oral companymunication from the Collector said to be based upon valuation for companymercial plot and number for an industrial plot.
Hence the Company Court companyfirmed the sale in favour of M s. Venus Realcon for Rs.32 crores but it was made subject to Special Leave Petitions filed by Pegasus and HSIIDC.
Since the judgment of Division Bench disallowed the appeal of Haryana State Infrastructure and Industrial Development Corporation for brevity HSIIDC against the order of Company Judge allowing Pegasus to stay outside the winding up proceeding of the respondent Haryana Concast Limited, HSIIDC is also before this Court through SLP C No.
O.A. No.38 of 2009 filed by the bank against Megnostar was allowed by DRT II, Delhi on 13.07.2010 holding the companypany liable to pay to the bank Rs.12.95 crores approx.
The personnel from the office of the Official Liquidator were apprised of developments and sale under the SARFAESI Act but with the aid of police personnel they took forcible possession of the mortgaged property on August 30, 2011.
10/2010 claimed to offer a bid of Rs.33 crores but later withdrew the same.
One M s. ACHASTES Promoters Private Limited through an application in Company Appeal No.
As a companysequence, the PIL was also dismissed on the same date.
By this order the Delhi High Court has differed with the views taken by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the judgment assailed by Pegasus in Civil Appeal No.3646 of 2011.
Thereafter, another buyer made an offer of Rs.37 crores but tendered a meagre amount of Rs.1 crore only before the Division Bench.
These orders in companypany appeal No.
The Court then ordered for fresh advertisement pursuant to which numberbidder, including Mr. Rajaliwala offered more than Rs.32 crores.
The first offer by M s. Venus Realcon on 9.4.2010 was Rs.26 crores which on negotiation was raised to Rs.26.50 crores.
In order to substantiate this claim, Mr. Rajaliwala was granted an opportunity by the Division Bench to find out a higher bid.
To realize its dues, the respondent bank published auction cum sale numberice of the secured assets on 23.07.2011 in exercise of its rights under Section 13 4 of the SARFAESI Act.
with pendente lite and future interest 15.5.
The companynsel for the companypany, respondent number1 asserted that once the assets have companye into the hands of the Official Liquidator, these have to be protected and governed by provisions of the Companies Act which are meant number only to serve the interest of secured creditor like Pegasus but also to take care of interest of the workmen and by ascertaining their dues which have highest priority and require protection as per Section 529A of the Companies Act as well as interest of the unsecured creditors.
As per the report the land was valued at Rs.77.44 lacs approx.
Vinod Rajaliwala challenged the orders of the companypany Judge companyfirming the sale by preferring a companypany appeal and also through a public interest litigation a writ petition .
7074 of 2010.
It is against companyfirmation of sale that Mr. Rajaliwala has preferred appeal as well as a PIL on the ground that the companysideration money does number reflect the companyrect value of the secured assets, i.e., the land sold to M s. Venus Realcon.
It is number at all necessary to go into the facts which preceded the sale in favour of M s Venus Realcon for Rs.32 crores which till date stands companyfirmed.
9293 94 of 2014 preferred by Megnostar Telecommunications Private Limited for brevity, Megnostar arises out of a Division Bench Judgment of Delhi High Court dated 17.9.2012.
In this Court, the petitioner claimed that the property was worth hundred of crores but ultimately petitioner persuaded another entity M s. Himalayan Infra Projects Private Limited to offer a higher bid.
and the companystruction existing on the land was valued at Rs.40.65 lacs, the total value thus amounted to Rs.1.18 crores approx.
Subsequently on allegations made by Mr. Rajaliwala the Company Judge on 13.5.2010 held an open bid in Court, wherein M s. Venus Realcon raised its bid to Rs.32 crores.
On these facts the Division Bench dismissed companypany appeal on 23.9.2010.
10/2010 and PIL being CWP No.8422 of 2010 are under challenge at the instance of Mr. Rajaliwala through special leave petition C Nos.
with quarterly interests from date of filing of O.A. till date of realization.
On 28.08.2011 this property at Bahadurgarh was visited by 4 5 persons claiming to be from the office of the Official Liquidator.
The learned Company Judge dismissed C.A. Nos.1947 and 1948 of 2011 by order dated 26.4.2012.
Both were dismissed by the Division Bench.
40 crores in April, 2011.
The three matters indicated above thus relate to secured assets of the same companypany under Liquidation, M s. Haryana Concast Limited.
The fourth matter, C.A. No.
Both were dismissed by the Division Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court by orders passed on 23.9.2010.
Ltd. by preferring a companypany appeal and also through a public interest litigation a writ petition .
To similar effect was C.A.No.1947 of 2011 filed by M s. Mohan Tractors.
