04 February 2008
Supreme Court
Download

M/S. S.B. OVERSEAS LTD. Vs M/S. KONARK JUTE LTD. .

Case number: C.A. No.-000994-000994 / 2008
Diary number: 12623 / 2007
Advocates: BIJOY KUMAR JAIN Vs RADHA SHYAM JENA


1

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1  

CASE NO.: Appeal (civil)  994 of 2008

PETITIONER: S.B. Overseas Ltd.

RESPONDENT: Konark Jute Ltd. & Ors.

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04/02/2008

BENCH: S.H. KAPADIA & B. SUDERSHAN REDDY

JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT

O R D E R (Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.8250/2007)         Leave granted.           A short question which arose before the Division Bench of the High Court was:  Whether after conclusion of the court’s sale, was it open to the Company Judge to  call for fresh bids?           This question was not answered by the Division Bench on the ground that appeal  under Section 483 of the Companies Act was not maintainable in law and that the  said appeal was misconceived as there was no adjudication of rights.  However, no  detailed reasons have been given in the impugned order for coming to the conclusion  that appeal under Section 483 was misconceived.  We do not wish to express any  opinion on the above question.  We also do not wish to express any opinion on the  merits of the case.         The impugned order is being set aside only on the ground that the High  Court  was required to consider various

legal aspects involved while answering the above question regarding non- maintainability of Section 483 of the Companies Act.  Prima facie, we may say that  this is an important question because certain rights of auction purchaser flows from  the conclusion of court’s sale and it is in this light that the Division Bench was  required to consider the question of maintainability of appeal under Section 483 of  the Companies Act.           In case the Division Bench now comes to the conclusion that appeal was  maintainable before it under Section 483, then, it may consider the contentions  raised by respondent No.4 herein on merits.           Accordingly, the impugned judgment is set aside.   Division Bench of the High  Court is requested to decided the said question within a period of eight weeks from  today.         Status quo as of today will continue.         The Appeal is disposed of accordingly.  No order as to costs.