TMI Blog1994 (7) TMI 354X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Punjab State Electronics Development and Production Corporation Ltd., Chandigarh. After constructing a part of the building on the land, the petitioner leased out the land and building to M/s. Magnetic Information Technology Ltd. -- a company incorporated under the Act and having its registered office at B-100, Phase VIII, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali (hereinafter called 'the Company ). The Company entered into possession on 1-1-1983. The lease was executed on 10-11-1983 w.e.f. 1-1-1983 and was for a period of 30 years. The monthly rent payable by the Company to the petitioner was ₹ 25,675/-. The lease deed was registered on 16-11-1983. It is common case of the parties that the rent was paid by the Company up to November, 1984 whereaf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uration of four months, no rent was payable by the Company to the petitioner in terms of the rent deed dated 10-11-1983/1-1-1983. Lastly, the agreement to sell had an arbitration clause and provided that in the event of any dispute or difference arising out of the agreement the matter shall be referred to the sole arbitration of a named arbitrator. 3. It is not in dispute that in pursuance of the aforesaid agreement to sell the Company paid a sum of ₹ 7,15,040.80 ps. within the stipulated period and thereafter disputes arose between the parties. The arrears of rent which were to be paid by 15-3-1987 were not paid nor was the amount of ₹ 13 lacs being the price of the structures raised on the plot paid. Both sides claimed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ney is paid and the respondent does not obtain the authority letter from the , bank authorising the sale of the plot and structure thereon, the claimant shall be entitled to purchase the whole property on the original amount of ₹ 25 lacs in all including misc. arrears of ₹ 5 lacs and nothing more. 5. If, however, the claimant's case fails and it is not entitled to purchase the land, although the respondent got the authority letter from the bank authorising the sale, with the result that the claimant remains tenant of the property, ₹ 7,15,040.80 shall be adjusted towards arrears of rent and balance, if any, will be recovered by the respondent from the claimant. 6. If the claimant discharges his obligation as state ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , a number of preliminary objections have been raised and it is stated that since the award which is the basis of the company petition is under challenge before the Senior Subordinate Judge, Chandigarh, this court should stay its hands in dealing with the matter till the civil Court finally adjudicates upon the validity of the award. It is also stated that disputed questions of law and fact have been raised in the petition which therefore, merits dismissal. It is further alleged on behalf of the company that the award of the arbitrator which creates an interest in immoveable property of the value of more than ₹ 100/- has not been registered and is, therefore, not admissible under the law. While relying on the doctrine of 'part per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... will cause sufficient damage to the reputation of the company if the award is ultimately set aside. The company cannot, therefore, be wound up on the basis of an award which is under challenge. 6. Mr. Narang, in support of the petition, contended that an award holder can apply for the winding up of a company on the basis of an unfiled award which is prima facie evidence of a debt. He cited Dalhousie Jute Co. Ltd. v. Mulchand Lakshmi Chand, (1983) 53 Corn Cas 607 in support of his contention. It is true that in that case a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court held that a winding up petition could be filed on the basis of an unfiled award as that was prima facie evidence of the debt. The present is not a case of an unfiled award but a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
