Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2015 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (2) TMI 1157 - DELHI HIGH COURTWinding up petition - Held that:- The case of an afterthought is quite different. To my mind, an afterthought is an explanation, or a defence, that has occurred to someone later on; i.e., after the opportunity to give his explanation had already been given to him; and he chose to offer some other explanation at that time, but not the one he is seeking to put forward now; even though all the relevant facts had already been brought home to him beforehand. This is not the factual situation here. Here the opportunity given in the form of a notice of demand discloses no material particulars at all. It follows therefore that the stand taken by the respondent in its reply to the petition for winding up filed in the Court, which is in response to further material particulars disclosed for the first time by the petitioner in the petition, cannot be said to an afterthought. In the case at hand, no attempt has been made to press any facts demonstrating the admission of any amount that could have become due and payable to the petitioner by the respondent. All that the respondent has been saying is that the petitioner should render complete and material particulars of all transactions, invoices etc. between the parties; and to come forward for a proper reconciliation of accounts. Keeping in view the unique and peculiar circumstances of this case, especially the type of notice for winding up that was issued by the petitioner to the respondent, do not think that the respondent has taken any unreasonable position. All this, coupled with the nature of the threat held out by the petitioner in the concluding paragraph of the notice of demand, makes it obvious that the petitioner has sought to abuse the jurisdiction of this Court with a view to coercing and pressurising the respondent to pay its demands, including interest demanded by it, without standing the test of evidence and cross-examination or even paying the court fee to recover its dues from the petitioner at civil law.
|