Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2014 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (4) TMI 831 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURTWinding up of company - whether the jewellery was manufactured from out of the gold supplied by the respondent or from out of its own gold by the petitioner - Held that:- there is no dispute about the manufacturing of jewellery by the petitioner at the request of the respondent and exporting the same to the designated customer of the respondent at Dubai. The value of jewellery exported by the petitioner and received by the respondent's customer is also not in dispute - Such a dispute would not have arisen if there were clear terms of understanding between the parties. The petitioner filed a copy of the MOU, a perusal of which would show that the same is bereft of essential terms such as the quantity of jewellery that was agreed to be exported and whether the jewellery has to be manufactured from out of the gold supplied by the respondent or from out of the petitioner's own gold. This Court is at a loss to know as to the reason for such a cryptic MOU between the parties while dealing with a very valuable subject matter of the contract, namely; manufacturing and exporting of gold ornaments. Under Section 433 read with Section 434 of the Act, a company cannot be ordered to be wound up, unless either the debt is admitted or the dispute as to the debt raised by the respondent is not bona fide. In the absence of a clear understanding between the parties stipulating that the petitioner will manufacture the jewellery from out of its own gold or at least any contemporaneous correspondence between the parties unequivocally proving the claim of the petitioner that it has manufactured the jewellery from out of its own gold and that the respondent has not supplied the gold, it is not possible for this Court to hold that the denial of the debt by the respondent is not bona fide. The respondent has filed purported vouchers in order to substantiate its plea that it has supplied its own gold under the said vouchers to the petitioner. However, the petitioner raised a plea that these vouchers are fabricated. This Court, while exercising its jurisdiction under the Act, will not adjudicate on this disputed issue - Company petition does not deserve to be admitted, as it has not satisfied the requirements of Sections 433 and 434 of the Act - Decided against appellant.
|