Super Antique Radiation Pvt Ltd vs Amresh Shukla Liquidator
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 683 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The application for extension of time to deposit the balance sale consideration is dismissed because, the balance amount having admittedly not been deposited, there is no ground for a further extension, after the successful bidder had already been granted two extensions and the earlier order of 08.04.2024 had directed deposit by 30.04.2024 with liberty to the Liquidator to proceed with e-Auction in default.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Super Antique Radiation Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant Versus Amresh Shukla, Liquidator ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant : Present but appearance not marked. For Respondent : Mr. Shantnu Chourasia, Mr. Mrinal Bharat Ram and Mr. Amresh Shula, Advocates for Liquidator.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
02.05.2024 : I.A. No. 3137 of 2024
1. This application is moved on 30.04.2024 to seek extension of only 2
months time till 30.06.2024, for depositing the remaining 80% amounting to
Rs.12.48 Crores/-.
2. The Order dated 08.04.2024 notes though the Applicant was a
Successful Bidder in a private sale and had deposited 20% of sale
consideration but could not deposit the entire amount within the time given.
3. Twice extension was granted and even vide order dated 08.04.2024, he
was directed to deposit the amount on or before 30.04.2024 since the e-
Auction was scheduled for 03.05.2024.
4. It was also noted in the said order that in case the Appellant fail to
deposit the entire amount by 30.04.2024, it would be open for the Liquidator
to proceed with the e-Auction in accordance with law.
5. Admittedly, balance amount is not deposited as yet, hence there is no
ground for further extension.
Application is dismissed.
[Justice Yogesh Khanna] Member (Judicial)
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Ajai Das Mehrotra] Member (Technical) himanshu/nn
I.A. No. 3137 of 2024 In Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 683 of 2024 2 of 2
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free