Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2016 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (8) TMI 1 - HC - Companies LawWinding up petition - Held that:- The defense raised by the Respondent Company is neither in good faith nor bonafide. As stated earlier, as far as the debt of the Respondent Company in relation to the Term Loan of ₹ 35 Crores is concerned, there is absolute no dispute and in fact none has been canvassed before me by Mr. Cama. In this view of the fact, on this count alone, and considering the fact that substantial amounts are due and payable by the Respondent Company to the Petitioner in relation to this Term Loan, the Petitioner would be entitled to an order of admission of the Company Petition. Even in relation to the Term Loan of ₹ 20 Crores disbursed to Borrower No.2 (and for which the Respondent Company stood as a Guarantor), find that even if one gives credit of ₹ 9 Crores entirely to the Respondent Company in relation to the said loan, substantial amounts would still be outstanding and payable by the Respondent Company to the Petitioner. In this view of the matter, find no substance in the contention of Mr. Cama that there is a serious dispute with reference to the claim made in the Petition. For all the aforesaid reasons, find that the substantial sum is undisputedly due and payable by the Respondent Company to the Petitioner which would warrant admission of the Company Petition. In this view of the matter, the following order is passed:- (i) The Company Petition is admitted and made returnable on 16th August, 2016. (ii) The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent Company waives service of the Company Petition under rule 28 of the Company (Court) Rules, 1959. (iii) The Company Petition shall be advertised in two local newspapers viz. (i) Free Press Journal (in English) and (ii) Navshakti (in Marathi) as also in (iii) Maharashtra Government Gazette. Any delay in publication of the advertisement in the Maharashtra Government Gazette and any resultant inadequacy of notice shall not invalidate such advertisement or notice and shall not constitute non-compliance with this direction or with the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959. (iv) The Petitioner shall, on or before 8st July, 2016 deposit a sum of ₹ 10,000/- towards publication charges with the Prothonotary and Senior Master, under intimation to the Company Registrar, failing which the Company Petition shall stand dismissed for non-prosecution without further reference to the Court. After the advertisements are issued, the balance, if any, shall be refunded to the Petitioner. It is clarified that the proceedings filed by the Petitioner against the Respondent Company in the DRT for recovery of its dues, shall be decided by the DRT on its own merits and without being influenced by any observations made in this order.
|