# In the matter of Arvind Damodharbhai Gaudana, Liquidator Of Regent Granito Limited  Vs State Tax Officer 2 & Anr.

> HC judgment dated 2025-04-28. Citation: TCN-2025-HC-00014. This is a Civil Application (for direction) in a Special Civil Application before the High Court of…

- **Court:** HC
- **Order date:** 28 Apr 2025
- **Citation:** TCN-2025-HC-00014
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/high-courts-new-delhi/arvind-damodharbhai-gaudana-liquidator-of-regent-granito-limited-vs-state-tax-of-b31f8828

## Summary

### Background

This is a Civil Application (for direction) in a Special Civil Application before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. The petitioner, Arvind Damodharbhai Gaudana, Liquidator of Regent Granito Limited, seeks directions related to the deposit of a certain amount in the court. The State Government, represented by the State Tax Officer, is the respondent. The case involves the interpretation of Section 53(1)(b)(ii) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and its application in the context of secured creditors.

## Facts

Arvind Damodharbhai Gaudana, the liquidator of Regent Granito Limited, filed a Civil Application seeking directions from the High Court of Gujarat. The liquidator undertook to deposit Rs. 15,40,12,000 in the court upon completion of the auction and receiving the balance consideration for the secured asset. The State Tax Officer 2 & Anr. are the respondents. The State Government, represented by the Advocate General, agreed to remove the charge on the property, with mutation entry reflecting the same in the revenue record. The deposited amount is subject to the outcome of pending Special Civil Applications No.8408 of 2021 and No.6706 of 2020. The case involves the interpretation of Section 53(1)(b)(ii) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, concerning the

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the petitioner should be directed to deposit Rs. 15,40,12,000 in the court upon completion …

**Ratio:** The court has the power to direct parties to deposit amounts in court to secure the

…

**Reasoning:** The court considered the petitioner's undertaking to deposit the amount and the need to

…

**Interpretation:** This interprets the court's inherent power to issue directions to ensure the

…

**Application:** The court applied this principle by directing the petitioner to deposit the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** ANIRUDDHA P…
- **Appellants:** ARVIND DAMODHARBHA…
- **Respondents:** REGENT GRANITO…; STATE TAX OFFICER…; +1 more
- **Other parties:** Kohi…

## Timeline

- **2025-04-26 — Additional Affidavit…**: The petitioner submitted an additional affidavit on behalf of the petitioner, which was…
- **2025-04-28 — IA Order…**: The court directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 15,40,12,000 upon completion of the…

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/high-courts-new-delhi/arvind-damodharbhai-gaudana-liquidator-of-regent-granito-limited-vs-state-tax-of-b31f8828