1. In compliance with the earlier order dated 24.4.2012 passed in Official Liquidator Report No.270 of 2011, Mr. S.D. Vasavada, learned advocate for respondent No.1 has filed a further affidavit in Company Petition No.133 of 2010 though Dr. Yajnik, learned advocate for the Official Liquidator is yet to receive a copy of the same. Mr. Abhishek Mehta, learned advocate for respondent No.16 seeks time to file counter to the further affidavit filed by respondent No.1.
2. Considering the contentions raised in the affidavit, the Official Liquidator shall file reply to the same and more particularly to the averments made in Para 8 of the said affidavit. The Official Liquidator is further directed to bring on record the copies of the alleged transfer which even according to respondent No.1 has been recorded in the records of Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation. It would also be open for respondent No.16 to place such details on record by way of affidavit which respondent No.16 intends to file.
3. Ms.
Sona Sagar, learned advocate for respondent No.3 UCO Bank at the earlier date had expressed apprehension about the security charges which may have to be borne by respondent No.3 because of the fact that respondent No.3 is in possession as trustee of the debenture holders and had to deposit an amount of Rs.2 lacs as per the earlier order passed by this Court. It is, however, made clear that the incidence of paying security charges being a separate issue, the same shall be decided by the Court. However, it is noted that UCO Bank - respondent No.3 is only working as a trustee on the basis of the earlier order passed by this Court. S.O. to 18.6.2012.
[R.M.CHHAYA, J.] mrpandya Top