- (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) The present appeal is filed by the appellant against an order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana on October 15, 2007 in Com pany Appeal No. 10 of 2006. By the said order, the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant-herein and confirmed the order passed by the Company Judge on February 16, 2006 in Company Application No. 178 of 2005 in Company Petition No. 42 of 1999.
(3.) Few facts of the case are that La Medical Devices Ltd. respondent No. 1 went into liquidation. Official Liquidator was ap pointed by the Court who is joined as Re spondent No. 1 in the present proceed ings. In view of the liquidation of the Com pany and dues to be paid by it, proceedings were initiated for sale of property of the Com pany. Sale notice was issued by the Com pany Court on October 19, 2004 which was published in various newspapers inviting sealed tenders for the sale of property of the Company situated at NOIDA (U.P.). Twelve bids were received which were opened on November 16, 2004. The bid of the appel lant for Rs. 1.47 crores for immovable as well as movable property was the highest. One of the creditors, namely, Pradeshiya Industrial and Investment Corporation of U.P. Ltd. (PICUP) granted 'no objection' to the sale-price. Since the appellant was the highest bidder, it wrote a letter to the Offi cial Liquidator on December 19, 2004 fol lowed by a reminder dated January 20, 2005 requesting him to expedite the process and issue letter of acceptance of the offer of the appellant so that possession of the Unit can be given to the appellant and the property could be made ready for commencement of production. It is the case of the appellant that there was no reply by the Official Liquidator to the appellant. The appellant, therefore, wrote a letter to the Com pany Judge on January 27, 2005, complain ing that though it was the duty of the Offi cial Liquidator to accept the highest offer submitted by the appellant, no action had been taken by the Official Liquidator and there was delay in the process of finaliza tion of acceptance of bid. The appellant also complained about the threat administered by the Official Liquidator. According to the appellant, thereafter on February 15, 2005, the Official Liquidator accepted the bid of the appellant for Rs. 1.47 crores for immovable property. The appellant on its own had forgone its claim of leased ma chinery. The Official Liquidator also in structed the appellant to deposit 25% of the bid amount for immovable property within fifteen days. The appellant, however, depos ited the said amount on the same day, i.e. February 15, 2005. According to the ap pellant, the Company Judge having found the auction in accordance with law and for adequate price and there being no other objection, confirmed the auction sale in favour of the appellant-Company on March 24, 2005. The Company Judge also di rected the Official Liquidator to hand over possession of the Unit by executing sale deed in favour of the appellant after receiving full and final payment within one month. The Official Liquidator conveyed the appellant vide his letter dated April 4, 2005 that an order was passed by the Company Judge in favour of the appellant. The appellant was also asked to deposit the rest of the amount immediately. On receiving the letter dated April 4, 2005 from the Official Liquidator, the appellant deposited the remaining amount on April 12, 2005. The appellant thereby became entitled to receive posses sion and execution of sale deed in respect of immovable property of the Company. By a communication dated April 21, 2005, the Official Liquidator informed the appellant that possession of the property would be handed over to the appellant on May 6, 2005 at 11.30 a.m.;