2010 (1) TMI 580

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed with the work by the respondent; that the same was, accordingly, done; that notices were sent calling for the balance amounts; that the earliest notice was sent on 31-1-2006; that thereafter, though part payments were made, the balance amounts were not settled; that under such circumstances, a notice was issued under section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, which brought forth a reply; that the appellant approached the Company Court since the admitted liability was not met, and, hence, the circumstances warrant for winding up of the respondent-company. 4. The petition was resisted by the respondent stating that the liability was neither settled nor payable; that there was a detailed reply wherein all the reasons were mentioned which woul .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... spondent-company was not solvent; that under such circumstances, it was a fit case for ordering winding up; but the learned Single Judge has taken an erroneous view, and under the circumstances, the order of the learned Single Judge has got to be set aside and an order of winding up be issued. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent made his earnest attempt of and put forth the reasons for sustaining the order of the Company Court. 8. The Court paid its anxious consideration on the submissions made and looked into the available materials. 9. It is not in controversy that the respondent entrusted some work with the appellant and the same was also done. Learned counsel for the appellant though repeatedly put forth his submission as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... inding up process cannot be taken as a device for recovery of money as regards the transactions between the parties. Merely because there was a notice under section 434 of the Companies Act, it would not lead to an order of winding up to be made. 11. For the reasons stated above, this Court is of the view that the learned Single Judge was perfectly correct in dismissing the petition. It is also further made clear while dismissing the petition for winding up that it is open to the appellant to work out his remedies if advised so and if allowed in law. Accordingly, this original side appeal is dismissed confirming the order of the learned Single Judge. The parties are directed to bear their own costs.
Case laws, Decisions, Judgements, Or .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X