``There is no rehabilitation proposal with the means of finances despite opportunities given to the company,'' the final order by members G Narayanan and S L Kapur said.

They said sick company KTL is not likely to make its networth exceed its accumulated losses within reasonable time while meeting all its financial obligations.

KTL was declared a sick company by the Board in 1985 and Industrial Finance Corporation of India (IFCI) was appointed as an operating agency (OA) to examine the company's viability and formulate a scheme for its revival.

After the BIFR bench noted ``the present promoters' total lack of concern in reviving the company,'' IFCI was directed to issue an advertisement for effecting a change in the company's management.

The OA was directed to advertise for offersincluding those for a takeover, leasing, amalgamation and merger for the company's rehabilitation.

IFCI was directed to submit a report to the Board after evaluating the relative merits of the offers and holding a joint meeting to arrive at a consensus.

The present promoters of KTL could not also submit their offer in response to the advertisement issued by the operating agency, the BIFR order noted.

But the OA issued the necessary advertisement in April 1998 though no response was received from any of the parties.

By an order dated July 1st, 1998, the bench concluded that there was no viable rehabilitation proposal ``with means of finance fully tied up for consideration despite ample opportunities having been given to all concerned.''

It further directed issue of a show cause notice for winding up of KTL under Section 20 (1) Sick Industrial Companies (special provisions) Act.

At a subsequent hearing on 16th September last year, the bench observed that the government of Karnataka had decided notto revive the company.

On their part, the OA submitted that M/s Chase Techno Inc. (CTI) informed them of its decision to accept only the assets of the company with the book value of Rs 6.77 crore, without any of the company's liabilities, and continue to employ existing employees.

The workers' representatives, on their part, submitted that they should be allowed an opportunity to revive the company. Subsequently, the bench directed that workers' representatives and CTI should discuss the proposal and submit a viable rehabilitation package "within two months."

But later, in a letter dated December 22nd 1998, IFCI informed the bench that no proposal had been furnished by either the workers or CTI.

Taking into account these circumstances, the bench concluded that promoters of KTL were not interested in the company's revival and hence ordered it to wind up.

"This opinion may be forwarded to the concerned high court along with copies of earlier orders/proceedings for necessary action of law," the BIFRorder stated.