Case Law Details
S. Pushpa Vs Official Liquidator (Madras High Court)
Introduction: This writ petition delves into the legal intricacies surrounding a property in Salem, as the petitioner strives for the de-sealing of their property at Bharathi Street. The conflict arises from the erroneous actions taken during the liquidation of M/s. Swathy Smart Card, the third respondent, which led to the sealing of the petitioner’s property.
Detailed Analysis: The petitioner, claiming ownership of the contested property, leased it to M/s. Swathy Smart Card. Following the petitioner’s acquisition of the property, the third respondent continued the lease. However, due to the third respondent’s liquidation, the Official Liquidator sealed the property. The petitioner, asserting rightful ownership, submitted a representation on 04.01.2022, urging respondents 1 and 2 to de-seal the property.
Mrs. P. Rajalakshmi, counsel for the petitioner, argues that an erroneous inclusion of the property in the third respondent’s assets occurred during an Income Tax Department check. Despite the petitioner’s plea, the property remains sealed, with the Official Liquidator in possession since 2016. The petitioner’s representation has gone unanswered, prompting this writ petition.
The Deputy Official Liquidator concedes the mistake, acknowledging that the property indeed belongs to the petitioner. Assurance is given for the vacation of the premises, but a request for sufficient time is made.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
