JUDGMENT Ravi Dhavan, J. - Heard learned counsel. 2. This is a matter in which the lands of the company in liquidation, it is reported by the official liquidator, were dissipated in the hands of strangers. Even when there were land acquisition proceedings, on the lands of the company, for a public purpose, the compensation was collected by strangers. The interest of the company over its assets continued as before even during winding up and the transfer of land being in violation of Sections 531 and 531-A of the Companies Act, 1956, is to be avoided by the official liquidator. In this regard the court has already passed detailed orders on January 3, 1991, March 21, 1991, July 30, 1991, August 7, 1991, and September 12, 1991. As the lands of the company have been the subject-matter of land acquisition proceedings, the records of the district are with the Collector. The court had given directions to make available all the information on the history of the transfer of the lands, beginning from one year prior to the date of the presentation of the winding-up petition. These are the records which, under the law, are kept under the control of the Collector. 3. When the court ordered disclosure on an affidavit, an affidavit (A-9) of Mr. Surya Prakash Lal, Special Land Acquisition Officer, Gorakhpur, was filed. The information was not satisfactory. The court desired complete disclosure by an affidavit of the Collector. Thus, an affidavit (A-10) was filed by the Collector (Mr. Kalka Prasad), giving certain details of the plots of land which, apparently, were possessed and owned by the company, but transferred into other hands. The information and details were not complete and, thus, the court permitted an indulgence of filing another affidavit and permitting this affidavit to be of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. Unfortunately, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate has filed an affidavit, but it is devoid of the details which are required by the court. Paragraphs 1 to 12 of the affidavit are identical to that filed by the Collector and only one paragraph 13 has been added. This implies that details on the transfer of possession or title of the plots or any proceedings which may have been pending sought by the court have yet to be disclosed. The proceedings before the High Court cannot continue for the details to come in piecemeal. This implies that details on the transfer of possession or title of the plots or any proceedings which may have been pending sought by the court have yet to be disclosed. The proceedings before the High Court cannot continue for the details to come in piecemeal. The order of winding up of the company was passed 26 years ago and the winding up proceedings cannot be concluded until each and every asset has been accounted for by the official liquidator to the High Court. Thereafter, when all the assets have been accounted for and distributed, the High Court permits the Registrar of Companies to strike off the name of the company from the register. But, until then the winding up proceedings would continue. 4. The very law which permits the official liquidator to ignore and avoid an action by which assets of a company are transferred within one year from the date of the presentation of the company petition, also confers power in him to summon any person for seeking information relating to the affairs of the company in liquidation. And, when the official liquidator summons any person, he does so regardless of his rank and status, whether he is a chairman of a company or an authority. Such a person shall attend the office of the official liquidator failing which he will be under the warrant of the High Court. 5. In the present case, to receive information on the affairs of a company, there are only two alternatives. One is that the official liquidator summons the Collector under Rule 160 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, and that would oblige the Collector to appear before the official liquidator and make complete disclosure of the records until the official liquidator is satisfied whether the history of the transfer of the land to any party, has been regular or irregular, and until then the inquiry shall continue. There is no occasion for the court to interfere with these powers of the official liquidator as it is the normal function of a liquidator to make inquiries. The official liquidator is not to get involved in unnecessary litigations in matters in which by law he is the authority to make inquiries affecting the assets and affairs of the company. 6. The official liquidator is not to get involved in unnecessary litigations in matters in which by law he is the authority to make inquiries affecting the assets and affairs of the company. 6. But, regard being had to this aspect of the law, learned standing counsel submits that the court may permit the Collector to appear before the court in relation to this matter so that the disclosure of the immovable property and assets of the company can be placed before the court. 7. There is no reason for the court to make an exception but under the residuary powers of the High Court, there can be proceedings on such of the matters as are not in open court, but to have such proceedings in chambers in pursuance of Rule 12 of the Companies (Court) Rules which this permits the High Court, if it thinks fit to direct that the hearing of any part or any of the matters before it shall be in its chambers. Thus, without prejudice to the powers of the official liquidator under Rule 160 which may not be misunderstood as having been waived, as a special case, on the request of standing counsel, the High Court permits the Collector to appear before the High Court on Saturday, November 23, 1991 (which incidentally is a working day), for proceedings in its chambers. Learned standing counsel has suggested this date as, before that, he submits, the Collector may be busy with the on coming bye-elections. The Collector may be accompanied by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate who is otherwise also familiar with the proceedings along with the entire relevant records regarding lands in question. 8. List in chambers on November 23, 1991, at 11 a.m. 9. A copy of this order be issued to the parties on being applied for within 48 hours.