by aroraanil92@gmail.com » Thu Jan 12, 2012 12:28 pm
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
17.
CO.PET. 39/2009 and CO. APPLS. 1031/2011, 1413/2011, 1761/2011,
2267/2011
DINESH MITTAL and ORS. ?.. Petitioner
Through Mr. Soumitra G. Chaudhuri, Advocate
for petitioner No.6.
versus
M/S TRIVENI INFRASTRUCTURE
DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD. ?.. Respondent
Through Mr. A.N. Haksar, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Udayan Jain, Advocate as
Amicus Curiae.
Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sanjay S. Chhabra,
Advocate for Ex.-Management
Mr. Ashish Makhija, Advocate for
Official Liquidator.
Mr. Rajiv Bahl, Advocate, Nominee
Director appointed by Court.
Mr. Rajat Aneja, Advocate for Investors.
Mr. Ankit Khurana, Advocate for Mr. Saran Suri, Advocate
for Oriental Bank of Commerce.
Mr. S.K. Mishra, Advocate for land owners at Ghaziabad.
Mr. Ranbir Yadav, Advocate for land owners at Rewari.
Mr. R.K. Nagpal with Mr. Javed Iqbal, Advocates for Investor/Mr.
Nitin Garg and Mr. Rajiv Kumar.
Cdr. J.K. Anand in person.
CO.PET. 333/2010
SH. SAMEER SHARMA ?.. Petitioner
CORAM:
HON?BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
O R D E R
19.12.2011
In pursuance to the advertisements published in ?Dainik Jagran?
(Hindi edition) on 9th December, 2011 and ?The Times of India? (English
edition) on 10th December, 2011, four bids have been received. A brief
description of the properties to be sold, the reserve price and the bids
received are indicated in the following Chart:-
Sl. No.
Property
Reserve Price (` In Lacs)
Name of Bidder
Offered amount
1.
Village Mandhiya Kalan and Village Bambad (Sector 22) Tehsil and District
Rewari, Haryana.
(Area : 53.98 acres)
2968.90
Adarsh Buildestate Limited
30,22,88,000/-
2.
Village Gari Alawalpur, (Sector-19), Tehsil Dharuhera, District Rewari,
Haryana.
(Area : 17.02 acres)
2468.50
D.S. Infra Services Private Limited
30,00,00,000/-
3.
Khasra No. 1337, 1338, 1366, 1367, 1368 Baipur, NH-2, Near Sikandra
(Rangoli Project) , Agra, (U.P.)
(Area : 8478 sq. yrd.)
460.82
Krishna Mayura Infraland Developers Pvt. Ltd.
4,66,29,000/-
4.
Plot No. 104-A, Village Abadi Tuglapur Haldona, Near Pari Chowk, Greater
Noida (U.P.)
(Area :1510 sq. mtrs.)
203.85
Mr. Rakesh Kasana
2,18,95,000/-
5.
Land situated on NH-24, Village Mehrauli Pargana, Tehsil Dasna,
Ghaziabad.
(Area : 27455.80 sq. mtrs.)
2310.00
No Bid Received
Since the bid received for Dharuhera property is a conditional one
and no bid has been received for Ghaziabad land, the management is
permitted to float fresh advertisements inviting bids in the aforesaid
newspapers. The advertisements should make it clear that bids would be
opened in this Court on 30th January, 2012 at 2.15 p.m. The Registry is
directed to return the bid received for Dharuhera property against a
proper receipt.
Though only one bid each has been received for the properties
situated at Agra and Greater Noida but as both these bids are above the
reserve price and are unconditional, the same are accepted with consent
of all the parties. It is pertinent to mention that Mr. Sandeep Sethi,
learned senior counsel for the ex-management assures this Court that
there is no encumbrance or outstanding liability with regard to either of
the aforesaid properties.
As far as the land having an area of 53.08 acres situated at Tehsil
and District Rewari, Haryana is concerned, though the bid is
unconditional and is above reserve price, Mr. Ranbir Yadav, Advocate
appearing for original land owners of Tehsil and District Rewari land has
raised some objections with regard to the sale of the said property. He
has pointed out that some sale deeds in favour of respondent-company with
regard to the land now sought to be sold in District Rewari, Haryana,
have been set aside by a Senior Civil Judge, Rewari and said matter is
pending in appeal.
It is pertinent to mention that the advertisement clearly mentions
that the property is being sold on ?as is where is and whatever there is
basis?. Moreover, all the lands are being sold believing the disclosures
made by the ex-management to be true and correct. Neither Court nor the
Committees appointed by this Court have given any assurance with regard
to title of any of the properties.
Consequently, the bid of bidder for Rewari property is accepted,
subject to the ex-management, the bidder and the former owners of said
land settling their inter se disputes amicably. It has been made clear
that in case the dispute is not resolved before the next date of hearing,
the bid amount shall be returned to said bidder. In that eventuality,
this Court may have no other option but to appoint a provisional
liquidator in respect of the respondent-company.
The demand drafts received today for the accepted bids shall be
handed over to Cdr. J.K. Anand against a receipt. The Monitoring
Committee is directed to keep the said amounts in a fixed deposit receipt
in a nationalised bank initially for a period of sixty-one days. It is
directed that the Monitoring Committee shall not utilise the amounts
received by it without prior leave of this Court.
Further, no financial commitment or undertaking to pay or payment
shall be made by the respondent-company in any Court/State
Authority/Forum without taking prior leave of this Court. However, the
former directors, who are arrayed as accused or as respondents in recovery proceedings or in cheque bouncing cases, are at liberty to amicably resolve the said matters at their own expense or cost.
Since the respondent-company is paying a huge rental of ` 8 lacs
per month, the Managing Committee as well as the Executive Committee are
directed to surrender to the landlord/owner the premises bearing No. A-
27, 2nd Floor, Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area, Phase-I, Mathura Road, New Delhi by 15th January, 2012. The Managing Committee and Executive
Committee are further directed to ensure that the staff of the
respondent-company are relocated at its site offices, if possible. The
Managing Committee is also directed to hire a very small premises for
storing its records and for maintaining its registered office in a place
within the jurisdiction of this Court.
The Board of Directors of the respondent-company are also directed
to take steps within a fortnight to rationalise and downsize staff of
respondent-company as this Court is prima facie of the opinion that
employing a large staff of about 40 employees at this stage is not
justified.
List on 30th January, 2012 at 2.15 p.m.
CO. APPL. 2222/2011 IN CO. PET. 333/2010
Present application has been filed seeking payment of amount
deposited by the applicant and for impleadment as co-petitioner.
Due to attachment order passed by the Income Tax Department, no
amount can be released to any investor/claimant at this stage.
Accordingly, the application is only allowed to the extent that applicant
is impleaded as co-petitioner in Co. Pet. 333/2010. The applicant is
also directed to file an affidavit disclosing its cause of action against
the respondent-company. Let an amended memo of parties be filed by the
petitioner.
Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
List on 30th January, 2012 at 2.15 p.m.
MANMOHAN,J
DECEMBER 19, 2011