Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2014 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (3) TMI 715 - BOMBAY HIGH COURTWinding up petition - Is an ex-parte default summary judgment obtained in a nonreciprocating foreign country against an Indian company a ‘debt’ due and payable by it within the meaning of Section 433(e) of the Companies Act, 1956? - Held that:- The entire petition is based on, and only on, the Houston decree. There is no mention in the petition of the original cause of action. Mr. Narula’s submission that the Houston decree was on merits is not one that I am prepared to accept. There is no reference to Coastal Marine in any part of the preceding discussion. The only discussion on “summary judgment evidence” is at internal page 5, and none of it is in relation to Coastal Marine, which is not mentioned even once. Section 13 uses the words “any matter thereby directly adjudicated upon”. The word “matter” means the right claimed, not the subject-matter. The Houston court decree has not been made a rule of an Indian court. It has not been subjected to the discipline of Section 13 of the CPC. It is not possible to hold that there is any debt due within the meaning of Section 433 and Section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956. - petition dismissed - Decided against the petitioner.
|