COMP.A No. 40 of 2025 __________ Page1 of 7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 15-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY COMP.A No. 40 of 2025 & COMP.A.No.88 & 170 of 2026 in C.P.No.57 of 1998 Comp.A.Nos.40 of 2025 & 88 of 2026 Suresh Omprakash Jangid (M-39) S/o.Omprakash Jangid, R/o.Wathoda,Nagpur, Maharashtra. ..Applicant(s) Vs 1. The Official Liquidator High Court, Madras as Liquidator of M/s.Maxworth Orchards (India) Ltd. (In Liquidation) 2. M/s.Maxworth Orchards (India)Ltd. Old No.38/1,New No.14/1, Akbarabad 2nd Street, Kodambakkam, Chennai-600 024. Represented by its Administrator Mrs.D.Nagasaila. ..Respondent(s) Comp.A.No.170 of 2026 Shah Doshi Service LLP Rep. by Authorised Signatory, Regd.Add.1148 E Ward, Sykes Extension, Shahupuri, Kolhapur, Maharashtra – 416001. ..Applicant(s) vs. 1. Suresh Omprakash Jangid S/o. Omprakash Jangid, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis COMP.A No. 40 of 2025 __________ Page2 of 7 R/o.Wathoda, Nagpur, Maharashtra. 2. The Official Liquidator, High Court Madras as Liquidator of M/s.Maxworth Orchards(India) Ltd., (In liquidation) 3. M/s.Maxworth Orchards (India)Ltd, Old No.38/1, New No.14/1, Akbarabad 2nd Street, Kodambakkam, Chennai-600024. Rep by its Administrator Mrs.D.Nagasaila. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER in Comp.A.No.40 of 2025: This company application is filed under Order XIV and Rule 8 of the O.S. Rules read with Rule 9 & 11(b) of Company Court Rules, praying to accept the applicant’s offer of Rs.48,00,000/- (Rupees Forty Eight Lakhs only) for the extent of 1373 Hectare (34 Acres) of land situated at Gram Panchayat-Borda, Mouza- Chatrapur, Tahsil-Ramtek, District-Nagpur, Maharashtra State comprised survey numbers morefully described in the schedule of the Judge’s summons belonging to M/s.Maxworth Orchards (India) Limited the company in provisional liquidation. PRAYER in Comp.A.No.88 of 2026: This company application is filed under Order XIV and Rule 8 of the O.S. Rules read with Sections 450, 456 & 457 of Company’s Act & Section 9, 11(b), 19 of the Company Court Rules, praying to (A) Exclude the Survey Nos.86(1.76 Hectares), 87/1 (4.77 Hectares), 88/1 (3.16 Hectares), 92 (2.24 Hectares), and 94 (1.80 Hectares) total 13.73 Hectares (approximately equivalent to 34 Acres) situated at Gram Panchayat-Borda, Mouza-Chatrapur, Tahsil-Ramtek, District-Nagpur, Maharashtra State in the proposed auction to be held on 10.06.2026 and (B) Direct the Official Liquidator to accept a sum of Rs.53.91 Lakhs as per the valuation submitted by ITCOT as much for 13.73 Hectare in Survey Nos.86 (1.76 Hectares), 87/1 (4.77 Hectares), 88/1 (3.16 Hectares), 92 (2.24 Hectares), and 94 (1.80 Hectares) total 13.73 Hectares (approximately equivalent to 34 Acres) situated at Gram Panchayat-Borda, Mouza-Chatrapur, Tahsil-Ramtek, District-Nagpur, Maharashtra State or such other sum as may be fixed by this Court based on the value arrived at the auction sale for the balance area. PRAYER in Comp.A.No.170 of 2026: This company application is filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of the O.S. Rules read with Rule 9 and rule 11(b) of the Company (Court) Rules, 1959, praying to implead the petitioner as respondent in the Comp. A.No.40 of 2025 in C.P.No.57 of 1998 and pass such further or https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis COMP.A No. 40 of 2025 __________ Page3 of 7 other orders as this Court fees just and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case. For Applicant(s): Mr.AR.M.Arunachalam for Mr.A.Prakash in CA Nos.40/2025&170/2026 Mr.T.Mohan, Senior Counsel for Mr.P.M.N.Bhagavath Krishnan in C.A.No.88 of 2026 For Respondent(s): Ms.Ambili B, Deputy Official Liquidator For R1 Ms.D.Nagasaila, Administrator for R2 Mr.AR.M.Arunachalam for R1 in C.A.No.170 of 2026 COMMON ORDER ITCOT submitted a valuation report in March 2026. On the basis of said valuation, the reserve price for the auction was fixed at Rs.271.82 lakhs. The Official Liquidator was directed to take necessary steps to conduct the auction in the presence of the learned Administrator. The auction was conducted on 10.06.2026. Pursuant thereto, the Official Liquidator has filed report dated 16.06.2026. It is recorded in the said report that the highest bid was received from M/s. SM Golden Trees Agro LLP, Nagpur, in a sum of Rs.13.30 crores. Because the report made reference to a communication received from the second highest bidder, M/s.Shah Doshi Service LLP, Kolhapur, the Official Liquidator was called upon to inform the second highest bidder about the next hearing date. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis COMP.A No. 40 of 2025 __________ Page4 of 7 2. The second highest bidder has filed an application for impleadment in C.A.No.40 of 2025. Learned counsel for the said bidder submits that it was intended to increase the bid amount by a further sum of Rs.30 lakhs beyond the highest bid amount of Rs.13.30 crores, but the proposed respondent was threatened with dire consequences and, therefore, he was unable to enhance the bid. Learned counsel submits that a memo of objection was filed with the office of the Official Liquidator on the same day. Learned counsel submits that the second highest bidder should be provided a further opportunity by conducting a re-auction or by enabling the two highest bidders to re-commence bidding. 3. The auction sale was conducted pursuant to orders of this Court by the Official Liquidator in the presence of the learned Administrator. In the Official Liquidator’s report, it is stated that the sealed tenders were opened in the auction hall. It is also stated that the highest offer was received from M/s.Garg Township Pvt. Limited in a sum of Rs.3.15 crores. Therefore, it is stated that the bidding process started from Rs.3.15 crores. It is also recorded that the highest bid was received from M/s.SM Golden Trees Agro LLP in a sum of Rs.13.30 crores and that the second highest bid was received from M/s.Shah Doshi Service LLP in a sum of Rs.13.29 crores. There is no evidence that the auction was not conducted properly. It is clear from the Official Liquidator’s report that M/s.Shah Doshi Service LLP participated in the auction and that the last bid by the said entity was for a sum of Rs.13.29 crores. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis COMP.A No. 40 of 2025 __________ Page5 of 7 4. The partner of the highest bidder, Mr.Suresh Omprakash Jangid, had earlier filed applications before this Court. In Comp.A. No.40 of 2025, the applicant requested that the offer of Rs.48 lakhs be accepted for an extent of 34 acres of land in the properties described in the Judge’s summons thereto. By order dated 10.04.2026, the applicant in C.A.No.40 of 2025 was permitted to participate in the auction. Pursuant thereto, the limited liability partnership in which said individual is a partner participated in the auction and was declared as the highest bidder. In C.A.No.40 of 2025, it is stated that the lands were acquired under a sale deed executed on 22.07.2020 in favour of said applicant. It is also stated that the revenue records relating to the lands forming the subject of said application were mutated in favour of said applicant. 5. It should also be noticed that said second highest bidder has stated as under in paragraph 6 of the impleading application: “I state that when an auction sale is conducted by Court there should be an assurance of warranty on title. After purchase of property, the purchaser should not be exposed to further litigation. I had also made to the Official Liquidator well ahead of auction on 9.6.2026 on the existence of 3rd parties title over the subject auction properties.” The sale was conducted with an express disclaimer both with regard to latent and patent defects. The second highest bidder in the auction sale asserts a right https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis COMP.A No. 40 of 2025 __________ Page6 of 7 to participate in a fresh auction while maintaining that there are adverse 3rd party claims and that there should be an assurance by way of warranty on title. 6. Considering the fact that there is no infirmity in the auction sale process and taking into account the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere with the auction at the instance of the second highest bidder. 7. Thus, no case is made out to interfere with the auction sale conducted earlier. The highest bidder submits that the balance sale consideration would be remitted within thirty days as per the terms of the auction. 8. Comp.A.No.40 of 2025 & Comp.A.Nos.88 & 170 of 2026 are disposed of on the above terms. 15-07-2026 KAL (1/2) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis COMP.A No. 40 of 2025 __________ Page7 of 7 SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J. KAL COMP.A No. 40 of 2025 & COMP.A.No.88 & 170 of 2026 in C.P.No.57 of 1998 15-07-2026 (1/2) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis