1. It has been recorded in the previous orders starting from order dated 26.07.2011 onwards until now that various disputes with regard to the title and ownership over the lands in question have been raised including the objections by lessors and the ULC authority. So far as lessors are concerned, it has been submitted that the issue is pending before the Apex Court and in case of one of the lessors it has been observed that any action which may create equity shall not be taken in respect of the lands where lessors are claiming their rights. In this background and also having regard to the time which has been consumed since the first valuation report was received, after hearing of concerned parties it was considered appropriate to invite fresh valuation report. Again, having regard to the dispute raised by some of the parties with regard to the first valuation report, it was also considered appropriate to invite valuation report from both the agencies i.e. one being the original valuer and the another being GITCO.
2. The valuation reports so invited are received by the Court and are maintained in sealed covers with the Registrar (Judicial). In the meanwhile, upon hearing the parties it has emerged, tentatively, that out of the total parcels of land in question, certain parcels certain original survey numbers are such which are, according to all concerned parties including ULC authority and lessors, completely freehold land in the ownership of the company. It appears that such land is admeasuring about 13800 Sq. Mtrs.
3. In the meanwhile, since valuation reports have been received by the Court and on one hand, it is claimed that on the basis of the valuer's report advertisement the path of inviting bids for auction should be followed and on the other hand some of the lessors who intend to submit or who have already submitted scheme for sanction i.e. scheme for revival/rehabilitation, are claiming that the Court may take steps/path towards consideration of the scheme.
4. In case of both the eventualities the central question would remain about the identification of parcels of lands available for the purpose of deciding as to whether there are any disputes as regards the title and ownership of the land.
5. It is noticed that in the order passed by the Division Bench, it has been directed that before considering either of the eventualities, valuation of the lands should be invited and the decision should be taken after comparing the proposal for scheme in light of the valuation.
6. Under the circumstances, as observed in the earlier order dated 13th February 2012 it is considered appropriate to follow the same procedure which this Court has followed in O.L.R. No.212 of 2011. Therefore, it is directed that Official Liquidator shall issue advertisement as "a pre decision advertisement" i.e. before the decision as regards further course of action is taken. The Official Liquidator, by virtue of such advertisement, shall invite objections from the concerned/interested parties who may have interest and/or right and/or any claim against the lands in question with regard to which couple of options as possible actions are under consideration by the Court. The Official Liquidator shall, in the advertisement, mention all original Survey numbers and Final Plot numbers of the lands in question and invite objections as regards the title and possession in respect of the said lands and/or any other claim or right or interest in the said lands. It may also be clarified that lessors who have already approached the Court or those who have not approached the Court may also submit their objections. The statutory authority, e.g. ULC Authority etc. may lodge their claim through AGP before the Court. The objections of the parties who are already before the Court will be considered regardless of the facts as to whether they submit their objections to the O.L. in response to the above mentioned advertisement or not. The O.L. shall mention in the advertisement the last date before which the objections should be submitted to the office of O.L. The O.L. shall allow at least 10 days' time for the said purpose.
7. The aforesaid course of action is considered necessary so as to avoid and eliminate, as far as may be possible, disputes and claims (which may lead to/result in to litigation) about title and ownership against the said lands so that any delays and litigation at later stage or any complications may be avoided and eliminated.
8. The Official Liquidator is directed to specify in the advertisement that all those persons who may raise any objection or any claim as regards title and ownership of lands in question, then they shall submit such claim on or before the last date prescribed in the advertisement and claims shall be supported by relevant documents and any claims received beyond the last date prescribed in the advertisement and/or without supporting documents shall not be considered.
9. Since, today learned Advocate Mr. Nanavati appearing for the ULC Authority has filed leave-note, it is considered appropriate to list present matter tomorrow to consider as to whether the said authority has any objection against the proposed action or not, the next date shall be fixed after hearing him. So far as the learned Advocate appearing for lessors, learned Advocate appearing for the concerned workmen and learned Advocate appearing for O.L. are concerned, they have submitted that they have no objection against the proposed action. Therefore, the Official Liquidator is directed to take steps in accordance with the above mentioned directions i.e. on the same line as have been taken in case of O.L.R. No.212 of 2011.
(K.M.THAKER, J.) jani Top