Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2012 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (10) TMI 7 - CALCUTTA, HIGH COURTWinding up application - nonpayment of creditors - petitioner sent out two Section 434 notices, one dated 10th October, 1992 and other dated 26th March, 1993 - company did not reply to first notice - Held that:- Companies Act, 1956 makes it explicit, that if a winding up notice is not replied to, by the company, immediately a presumption of insolvency is drawn (See Section 434 (1) (a) of the Companies Act, 1956). Further, there is a discrepancy in the defence taken in the reply to the statutory notice and in the Affidavit-in-Opposition. In the reply to the statutory notice it was said that there was full and final satisfaction of the claim of the petitioner. If, there was full and final satisfaction of the claim of the petitioner, there was admission of supply. This is inconsistent with the defence in the Affidavit-in-Opposition that the bills and challans are forged which if substantiated would go to show that no supply was made. There is clear evidence of supply of steel wires and there is no evidence on record to prove that the petitioner was satisfied with payment made and gave up its claim for the balance. Therefore, company has no defence to the claim of the petitioning creditor and winding up application is admitted.
|