Delhi High Court
M/S Swet Chem Antibiotics Ltd vs .. on 4 September, 2017
$~C-60
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Delivered on: 04th September, 2017
+ CO.PET. 509/2010
M/S SWET CHEM ANTIBIOTICS LTD
..... Petitioner
Through : Mr.Abhayraj Verma and
Ms.Priyanka Ghosh, Advs.
versus
..
..... Respondent
Through : Mr.Arun Bhardwa, AAG for State
of Haryana for R-1, 6 to 8
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA
YOGESH KHANNA, J.
1. It is submitted by learned counsel for the company refers to an
order dated 22.09.2010 of the BIFR :
"2.7.4 Having regard to the submissions made in the
hearing today, and the background of the case as per the
information on file, the Bench confirmed its earlier opinion
that despite allowing adequate time and opportunity to the
company/promoters and exploring other possible avenues
also, it had not been possible to work out any acceptable
revival scheme which could enable the company to run its
networth positive within a reasonable time frame while
discharging all its due financial obligations. Accordingly,
the Bench observed that under the circumstances and merits
of the case, there was no other option but to confirm its
prima-facie opinion that it would be just, equitable and in
public interest if the sick company - M/s Swet Chem
Antibiotics ltd. is wound up in terms of Section 20(1) of
SICA. Let this opinion be forwarded to the concerned High
Court along with copies of all the orders passed by the
Bench in the case from time to time, for further necessary
action in accordance with law."
2. Thereafter, the company made efforts to revive itself and cleared
of its debts, even of the two secured creditors. Now only the liability qua
the Sales Tax Dept. is pending. The learned counsel for the Sales Tax
Department on instructions submit that the securities given by the
respondent company to pay the taxes are sufficient. In view of the above
it is submitted that the order dated 22.09.2010 of BIFR needs to be
modified.
3. The affidavit of compliance has been filed by the respondent
company and it reveals that the net worth of the company has now turned
positive. In Seth Industries Ltd. V. AAIFR 2007 SCC online Del 381 the
BIFR recommended winding up of the petitioner company but since its
net worth had turned positive so pending a dispute with one of its
creditors, the company was ordered to be revived and the order of BIFR
was ordered to be set aside. Para 8 of the judgment is relevant and it
reads as under :
"8. We are of the view that since all the municipal Taxes
have been paid and the company has also paid income tax
amounting to Rs. 79 lacs on its profits the company has thus
shown its positive net worth, as per its latest audited
balance-sheet, to the tune of Rs. 6.27 crores and all the
secured creditors have been paid except those agitating
through Woolen Kamgar Sanghatana, the appropriate order
in the interest of justice of the company as well as the
workmen sought to be represented by Woolen Kamgar
Sanghatana, would be to take the company out of the
purview of Sick Industrial Companies Act and secure
adequate finances for satisfying the claim of the workmen in
the Bombay High Court put forth by Woolen Kamgar
Sanghatana. Having taken into account the aforesaid
averments we are of the view that since the averments made
in the application remained uncontroverter except the plea
of the Woolen Kamgar Union said to be representing the
workmen, the proceedings before the BIFR cannot now
survive as the net worth of the company has become positive
and accordingly, the orders impugned deserve to be set
aside. If the creditors have been paid and further
arrangements have been made to secure the interest of the
workmen by the deposit of Rs. 8.41 crores and the
disbursement of Rs. 3.5 crores as well as the fact that the
order dated 1st March, 2007 contemplated an additional
bank guarantee to be furnished in the sum of Rs. 1.5 crores,
we are of the view that this would adequately protect the
interest of the workmen though the claim now sought to be
raised is said to be larger. However, taking into account the
existing pleadings of the parties even in the Bombay High
Court, we are of the view that the sums already deposited in
Bombay High Court ( Rs. 8.5 crores), disbursed ( Rs. 3.5
crores) and ordered to be secured by way of bank guarantee
( Rs. 1.5 crores) by today's order would adequately protect
the interest of the workmen and no further orders are called
for. Even if we take the figure of Rs. 5 crores to be less than
the actual claim, as contended by Ms. Singh, the sum
enhanced by Rs. 1.5 crores, in addition to the deposit of Rs.
8.36 crores in our view, would sufficiently protect the
interest of the workmen. Accordingly, we direct that the
Cowtown Land Developers shall furnish a bank guarantee of
Rs. 1.5 crores before the Prothonotary and Senior Master of
the Bombay High Court in LPA No. 51/2005 with an
advance copy to the learned Counsel appearing for the
Woolen Kamgar Sanghtana."
4. Considering the submissions made and since now there is no
objection from any of the secured creditors except a tax liability of the
Sales Tax Department which also is secured by the company till the time
the appeals inter se qua such liability are not disposed of, hence in view
of the above, the order dated 22.09.2010 of BIFR is set aside and the
order dated 08.12.2010 to the following effect : ".......Swet Chem
Antibiotics will not part with, encumber, sell or dispose of any of their
assets including moveable assets till the next date of hearing.", also
stands vacated.
5. The petition is disposed of.
YOGESH KHANNA, J
SEPTEMBER 04, 2017
VLD
