- (1.) COMPANY Application 661/2012 is filed to recall the order dated 23.09.2011 passed in C.A.985/2011 cancelling the sale in favour of applicant-Bank, i.e., Citizen Co-operative Bank Ltd., and permit the respondent herein to execute the sale deed in respect of the property involved in this application in favour of applicant-Bank for a consideration of Rs.1,35,00,000-00 and direct the applicant-Bank to pay the balance amount of Rs.1,02,75,000-00 to the respondent and confirm the sale in favour of the applicant-Bank.
(2.) THE aforesaid order was challenged by preferring an appeal, which came to be dismissed. It is submitted that against the said order, Special Leave Petition is filed before the Apex Court and it is pending. The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that they would like to withdraw the said Special Leave Petition. In the aforesaid circumstances, the question of recalling the order dated 23.09.2011 which is merged with the appellate order would not arise. Therefore the question of recalling the order dated 23.09.2011 is rejected. However, the remaining prayer is considered on its merits. The applicant is the tenant under the Company for more than eight years. In this proceedings when the said property was brought to sale, he offered his bid. As his bid was highest, it was accepted by this Court. Thereafter, he was granted time to pay the amount. Though he was ready with the money he insisted on certain conditions to be fulfilled by the Company before he pays the balance sale consideration. He filed Company Application in C.A.985/2011 requesting the Court to compel the Company to fulfill those conditions. By a considered order, that application came to be dismissed. The Company was directed to issue fresh notice bringing the property to sale and it was also made clear that as the applicant has denied the title of the Company as is not satisfied with the title, it is not permitted to participate in the resale proceedings. Thereafter the Company issued advertisement. Several people offered their bid. But as the said bid was less than what was offered by the applicant on earlier occasion, they were all rejected and fresh advertisement was issued. In the mean while better sense has prevailed upon the applicant and he wants to retrace his steps. For that purpose, the present application is filed. The balance amount payable as per the order of this Court is Rs.1,02,75,000-00. If the applicant-Bank pays the entire money and becomes the owner of the property, the Company has to refund the six months advance amount which it has paid at the time of commencement of tenancy, which is in a sum of Rs.2,19,000- 00. After deducting the said amount, he has brought a Pay Order for a sum of Rs.1,00,56,000-00 only, towards the balance sale consideration payable. The learned Counsel for the Company has no objection for allowing this application.
(3.) THIS Court has formulated a scheme by which, nearly 90,000 people are paid their legitimate dues in five yearly instalments. However, the said commitment could not be kept up by the Company for various reasons. Though attempt is made to sell properties and pay the creditors, there are some genuine difficulties. The creditors are all old, sick and senior citizens. Their patience is coming to an end. Under these circumstances, as far as the property involved in the application is concerned is in the occupation of applicant-Bank as tenant, though property is notified for sale more than once, the bidders are not prepared to pay the market value of the property, as the tenant is in occupation. It is in that context, the offer by the applicant-Bank namely Rs.1,35,00,000-00 was the best offer. In fact, the applicant also has paid a sum of Rs.32,25,000-00 nearly two years back and is in deposit in the Company. Though he insisted that the Company should make good the title, hand over the original title deeds and has to comply with other legal requirements, without which he was not willing to pay the balance amount, as stated above, he is now taking the property in 'as and where' condition. The applicant with his possession over the property for more than 10 years coupled with the documents which are to be handed over to him by the Company and the fact that this sale transaction has been done in pursuance of the orders passed by this Court, should be sufficient to protect the interest of the applicant and dispel all his apprehensions. Under these circumstances, keeping in mind the interest of the creditors, prevailing market condition, the fact that the property could not be sold with a tenant for a good price, it would be appropriate to accept the bid of the applicant and confirm the sale in favour of the applicant-Bank.;