TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 703X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... per the interest of large number of lenders which are participating in the process of restructuring of the respondent company. I am thus inclined to allow the intervention application filed by the IDBI Bank Limited and permit them to intervene in the present proceedings at the admission stage. Scope of revival - rectification and restructuring actions - Held that:- When 98% of the creditors in value of the total debts of the respondent have agreed to oppose this petition for winding up and have been participating in the JLF's meetings to take steps for rectification and restructuring of the respondent and some decisions taken by the said JLF are under implementation, in view, the petition at the instance of the petitioner who claims about 1% of the total debts of the respondent cannot be entertained. An order of winding up in favour of the petitioner would not benefit the petitioner or the creditors of the respondent generally. Even if there are any chances of revival of the respondent-company which are attempted by the creditors of more than 98% in value, any adverse order passed in this petition at this stage would hamper the chances of revival of the respondent. Powers of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ose Current Assets and Receivables created out of the financial assistance provided by the petitioner under any of the facilities contemplated under the said Master Facility Agreement. 3. on 8th February, 2016, the petitioner disbursed a sum of ₹ 20.00 crores under the said Master Facility Agreement. The petitioner issued various letters of credit in accordance with the limits under the said agreement. 4. Vide a letter dated 7th May, 2016, the petitioner reminded the respondent that an amount of ₹ 20.00 crores under the short term loan facility was to be repaid by the respondent on or before 7th May, 2016, which the respondent had failed and neglected to repay and discharge its obligations under the said agreement. The petitioner called upon the respondent to make payment of the said amount within a period of two days and threatened to take such steps as may be necessary for enforcing its rights in the event of the default of the respondent. 5. On 10th May, 2016, the letter of credit for US $ 3,814,803.80 became due and payable by the respondent to the petitioner. Vide a letter dated 10th May, 2016, the petitioner informed the respondent that in addition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... On 19th May, 2016, the petitioner issued a statutory notice for winding up under section 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 to the respondent. 11. It is the case of the petitioner that on 20th May, 2016, the letter of credit for US $ 2,634,863.51 became due and payable by the respondent to the petitioner. On 20th May, 2016, the petitioner vide its letter sent a reminder to the respondent regarding outstanding amount payable under the said agreement and called upon the respondent to repay the said amount along with interest. 12. It is the case of the petitioner that on 23rd May, 2016, letter of credit for US $ 33,11,938.18 became due and payable by the respondent to the petitioner. On 23rd May, 2016, the petitioner sent a reminder to the respondent regarding the alleged outstanding amount payable under the said agreement. 13. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent made an announcement on 21st May, 2016 through Bombay Stock Exchange that the respondent would be convening a meeting on 30th May, 2016 recommending dividend for the year ending 31st March, 2016. The petitioner vide its letter dated 25th May, 2016, reminded the respondent that the responde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the company petition, including the correspondence exchanged between the parties and also to the averments made in the Company Application No.445 of 2016 and more particularly in paragraph 7. He submits that the respondent has sold its stake to another company i.e. Ruchi Kagome Foods India Private Limited. Reliance is also placed on press release dated 22nd May, 2016 in support of the submission that the respondent had proposed to take steps to hive off its business to a third party i.e. Adani Wilmar Limited. 18. Learned senior counsel placed reliance on the order passed by the Security Exchange Board of India (SEBI) making various observations about alleged dubious plan of the respondent and fraud alleged to have been committed by the respondent. He also placed reliance on the letter dated 30th March, 2016 addressed by the respondent to the Bombay Stock Exchange and National Stock Exchange pointing out the out come of the meetings of the Board of Directors of the respondent. He submits that the loss suffered by the respondent during the financial year 2015-2016 itself according to the said letter is about ₹ 811.70 crores. He also placed reliance on the audited repo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned senior counsel for the petitioner also led emphasis on clauses 3.2 to 3.4 of the said circular and would submit that if the lenders would have proceeded with restructuring of the account, such decision would have been binding on the lenders only if minimum of 75% of the creditors by value and 60% of the creditors by number in the said Joint Lender's Forum would have signed Inter Creditors Agreement and not otherwise. He submits that admittedly no such Inter Creditors Agreement was signed by the petitioner and thus the decisions, if any, even if taken by 75% of the creditors by value and 60% of the creditors by number in the JLF would not be binding upon the petitioner. He submits that under clauses 3.3 and 3.4 of the said circular, no such agreement was arrived at between the JLF and the respondent within the time prescribed therein. 23. Reliance is also placed on clauses 7.1 and 7.2 of the said circular. It is submitted that the rights vested in the lender for recovery of amounts due under the loan agreement and other facilities executed between the parties and to file the proceedings for recovery of the said amounts or for seeking winding up of the borrower company c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us submissions made in the additional affidavit dated 31st August, 2016 and submits that 8 out of 11 Crushing plant of the respondent are already closed. He submits that the mark to market loss of the respondent is about ₹ 522.00 crores. The total debts of the respondent company are more than ₹ 9451.80 crores. The respondent has admitted its outstanding liability to the petitioner at least to the extent of ₹ 192.30 crores and has admitted its debts of ₹ 9451.80 crores. 28. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the minutes of the meeting dated 28th July, 2016 of the said JLF, which was attended by the representative of the petitioner. He submits that even if the petitioner has made any suggestion in any of the JLF meeting or had attended the said meeting, the decisions taken, if any, in such meetings of the said JLF were not binding upon the petitioner in view of the petitioner not having signed the Inter Creditor's Agreement or Debtor Creditor's Agreement, no decision taken by the said JLF could be made applicable to the petitioner. He also invited my attention to the minutes of the meeting of the said JLF held on 7th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court in case of IBA Health (India) Private Limited vs. Drive Systems SDN Board, (2010) 10 SCC 553 . He submits that even if SDR scheme as canvassed by the said JLF is pending, the company petition for winding up can still be admitted since the conditions of winding up of the company are satisfied. 32. Mr. Kadam, learned senior counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in the case of BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd. Vs. Wockhardt Ltd., (2014) 187 Comp Cas 301 (Bom) and in particular paragraph on page 339 in support of his submission that the petitioner cannot be forced to join the SDR scheme. The law does not postulates any such compulsion on the petitioner. He submits that the respondent-company cannot compel the petitioner to join SDR scheme and since the petitioner has not agreed to join SDR scheme, the present petition for winding up of the respondent is maintainable. He submits that in this case the claims of the petitioner are admitted by the respondent and the conditions of winding up of the respondent-company are satisfied. 33. Learned senior counsel distinguishes the judgment of this Court in the case of Tata Capital Fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s that it is not open to the dissenting lender to continue with its existing exposure and simultaneously not agree for rectification or restructuring as part of the corrective action plan. He submits that various circulars referred to and relied upon by the respondent in the affidavit-in-reply which are also referred to by the petitioner are binding on all the banks including the petitioner. 36. Learned senior counsel for the respondent placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Canara Bank Vs. P.R.N. Upadhyaya and Ors., (1998) 6 SCC 526 and in particular paragraph 11 thereof in support of his submission that the circulars issued by the Reserve Bank of India under Section 21 or 35 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 are statutory in nature and are required to be complied with by the banks. Mr. Kadam, learned senior counsel for the petitioner at this stage states that there is no dispute that the circulars issued by the Reserve Bank of India under Section 21 or 35 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 are statutory in nature and are binding on all the banks. 37. In so far as the submission of the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that unl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ainst such lenders who change their stance and refuses to implement the package or causes delay. He submits that since the said provision contemplates for punitive action, it presupposes that other provisions provided therein are binding and are mandatory in nature. He submits that the said provision would be binding even upon the lenders who are not members of consortium. 40. Learned senior counsel for the respondent placed reliance on clauses 5.2 and 6.2 of the Circular dated 24th September 2015 which provides for an Exit option to the lenders in certain circumstances. He submits that clause 6.2 of the said circular relied upon by the petitioner would not assist the case of the petitioner in support of its case that unless the petitioner would be signatory to the Inter Creditor Agreement and the Debtor Creditor Agreement, there was no question of exercising any option of exit from the JLF. He submits that such Inter Creditor Agreement and Debtor Creditor Agreement have to be entered into after the decision of restructuring of the account of the borrower is decided by the JLF. He submits that the scheme framed and the decision taken by the JLF have to be made workable. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the respondent-company employs 8325 persons and has paid all its employees their wages. The total wages paid in the Financial Year 2015-2016 aggregates to ₹ 2,11,37,00,000/-. 44. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel for the respondent that in so far as the order passed by the Security Exchange Board of India which has been relied upon by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner is concerned, the said order was passed ex-parte. He submits that by the said order, a show cause notice was issued to the respondent with an opportunity to file an objection which objection has already been filed by the respondent. He submits that in any event, the said order passed by the Security Exchange Board of India is only a prima-facie order and is not relevant for the purpose of deciding this petition. 45. Learned senior counsel for the respondent placed reliance on the minutes of meeting dated 26th August 2016 held by the Consortium and would submit that the said consortium comprising of the said 21 bankers have already passed a resolution unanimously to oppose the said winding up petition and have authorised IDBI bank as a leader of consortium to file an interven ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iously affects the market position of a company, the wishes of the workers, creditors and the contributories has to be considered by this Court even at the admission stage of the winding up petition. He submits that this Court has after adverting to the judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of M/s.Madhusudan Gordhandas Co. (supra) and Bipla Chemical Industries Vs. Shree Keshariya Investment Ltd., (1977) 47 Company Cases 211 and other judgments has held that the right of the creditors to appear and be heard in all matters relating to the winding up of a company is recognised by law. 48. Learned senior counsel for the respondent also placed reliance on the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the matter of Rishi Enterprises, (1992) 73 Comp Cas 271 and in particular paragraphs 1 to 6 in support of the submission that the wishes of the workers and creditors have to be considered and the Court may decline to make a winding up order. 49. Learned senior counsel for the respondent placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in the case of Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. Vs. Unity Infraprojects Ltd. Ors. (supra) and in particular paragraphs 13 to 17 in sup ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts that total debts of the respondent towards those 21 members of the consortium is about ₹ 8593 crore. The principal amount of the petitioner is however only to the extent of ₹ 70 crore. He submits that the alleged liability of the petitioner recoverable from the respondent company is hardly 2% of the total debts of the other lenders and is at 1% of the debts of the total creditors. 52. In so far as the circulars issued by the Reserve Bank of India from time to time which are relied upon by the respondent is concerned, it is submitted by the learned counsel that those resolutions have statutory force and are binding on all banks including the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner has participated in the meetings held by the said JLF from time to time and could not have filed this company petition. He submits that since 21 secured creditors are opposing the admission of this company petition and other reliefs as prayed, the wishes of these 21 creditors have to be considered by this Court before admitting the company petition or before passing any interim order. Learned counsel also sought reliance on various judgments referred to and relied upon by Mr.Doctor, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he petitioner had not signed any Inter Creditor Agreement and Debtor Creditor Agreement and thus were not bound by the decision, if any, taken by the JLF is concerned, the learned counsel for the intervenor placed reliance on clauses 7.1, 7.3 and 9.2 of the said circular dated 26th February 2014 and would submit that those accelerated provision would apply if any default is committed after execution of Inter Creditor Agreement and Debtor Creditor Agreement. He submits that clause 7.3 specifically provides for the consequences for non-compliance of the obligations prior to such execution of Inter Creditor Agreement and Debtor Creditor Agreement. He submits that since the said circular provides for punitive action for committing breaches of obligations of the parties, it presupposes that the compliance of the obligations under those circulars are not optional but mandatory. 57. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Intervenor that out of 21 members of consortium who are also the members of the said JLF, 18 members have already signed the JLF Master Agreement. He submits that stage of execution of Inter Creditor Agreement and Debtor Creditor Agreement has not reached so ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this petition is admitted and if the petition is advertised in accordance with the Company (Courts) Rules. He submits that the minutes of the meeting of the JLF also clearly indicates that different suggestions were given by the different creditors and there is total uncertainty whether any of the suggestions given by those lenders present in those JLF meetings were implementable or not. 60. It is submitted that the circular dated 26th February,2014 issued by the RBI does not override the contractual rights of the petitioner with the respondent. He submits that the said circular does not provide that the said circular would be binding on the petitioner and the right of the petitioner being one of the creditor would be suspended or would not be enforced if a JLF is formed. 61. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner once again led emphasis on clause 3(1)(b) of the circular and would submit that even the said provision clearly indicates that the lenders are given an option to sign the Inter Creditor Agreement or Debtor Creditor Agreement. He submits that even the said provision provides that the stand-still clause may be stipulated in the Debtor Creditor Agreement. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... various suggestions to revive the respondent company but it is not in the interest of the petitioner to wait and watch for a longer period for the outcome of the implementation of the various conflicting suggestions given by the lenders in the JLF. 65. Mr.Doctor, learned senior counsel for the respondent submits that the debt of the petitioner is only to the extent of 1% of the total debts of the creditors and 2% of the debts of the total creditors of the other banks and financial institutions who are supporting the respondent. He submits that in these circumstances, this court shall exercise the discretionary power in this winding up petition in favour of the respondent and not the petitioner. REASONS AND CONCLUSIONS : 66. I will first decide the issue as to whether the IDBI Bank Limited, a Consortium Leader representing the consortium of 21 banks who have lent and advanced huge amounts to the respondent company can be allowed to intervene in this company petition at the stage of admission of the company petition or can be allowed to intervene only after the company petition is admitted and notice is issued for final hearing of the company petition. The IDBI Bank ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adhu Woolen Industries Private Limited, (supra) had considered the issue whether the creditors of the company can be allowed to oppose the petition for winding up at the admission stage or not. The Supreme Court in the said judgment held that if there is opposition to the making of the winding up order by the creditors, the Court will consider their wishes and may decline to make winding up order . Under section 557 of the Companies Act, 1956 in all matters relating to the winding up of the company the Court may ascertain the wishes of the creditors. It is held that winding up order will not be made on a creditor's petition if it would not benefit him or the company's creditors generally. 71. In case of National Textile Workers' Union Ors. vs. P.R. Ramakrishnan, (supra) the Supreme Court laid down principle that the workers are entitled to appear at the admission stage of winding up petition either to support or oppose it and so long as no winding up order is made by the Court. It is held by the Supreme Court in the said judgment that the workers have a locus to appear and be heard in the winding up petition both before the winding up petition is admitted and an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... troleum Corporation Limited (supra) is per-incurium on the ground that the judgment of this Court in the matter of Advent Corporation Private Limited (supra) was not brought to the notice of this Court when the judgment in Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (supra) was delivered by this Court in the year 2004. 75. This Court in case of Tata Capital Financial Services Limited (supra) has adverted to the judgment of this Court and has held that broadly all aspects concerning advisability of a winding up order in the face of various circumstances, including a CDR package under implementation between a company and its secured or other lenders, is a matter which very much forms part of the consideration of the Company Court in a winding up petition not only at the stage of final disposal, but also, depending on facts of an individual case, at the time of admission of a winding up petition. It is held that restructuring package in respect of a debt of a respondent company being under active implementation and reflecting materially on the viability of the company as also the effect of a winding up order, or even an order of admission of a winding up petition, on the implementation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent company. 78. This Court in case of Hy-Line International vs. C M Hy-Line Farms Private Limited, 2004 (3) Mh.L.J. 922 has followed the judgment of this Court in case of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (supra) and has held that the secured creditors can be heard at the stage of admission of company petition and can be permitted to intervene. The said judgment applies to the facts of this case. I am respectfully bound by the said judgment. 79. Insofar as the facts of this case are concerned, it is not in dispute that the applicant IDBI Bank Limited is a leader of Consortium of 21 banks and is authorized to represent them before this Court. Such Consortium has also participated in the JLF meetings and have already taken a decision to oppose the company petition filed by the petitioner. The Consortium and other members of the said JLF have also taken various decisions in the meetings towards restructuring the respondent company. The total debts of the members of the said Consortium recoverable from the respondent company are much larger than the claim of the petitioner. A perusal of the company application filed by the intervenor indicates that the wor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te exposure of lenders in that account is ₹ 1000 millions and above. It is thus clear that in the said event, formation of JLF is mandatory. It is not in dispute that the account of the respondent was classified as SMA-2. It is also not in dispute that the claim of the respondent and several other creditors is more than ₹ 1000 millions and the amount had not been serviced for more than 60 days. 83. Clause 2.6 of the said circular provides that all the lenders should formulate and sign an agreement which may be called as JLF agreement incorporating the broad rules for the functioning of the said JLF. The Indian Banks Association has to prepare master JLF agreement and operational guidelines for JLF which could be adopted by all the lenders. The said JLF has to explore the possibility of the borrower setting right the irregularities / weaknesses in the account. 84. Clause 2.7 of the said circular provides that while JLF formation and subsequent corrective actions will be mandatory in accounts having aggregate exposure of ₹ 1000 million and above, in other cases also the lenders will have to monitor the asset quality closely and take corrective action for e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ses to implement the package. will also be subjected to accelerated provisioning requirement as indicated in paragraph 7.1. 88. Clause 5 of the said circular dated 24th September, 2015 clearly provides for exit option available to the lender. Dissenting lender who is not willing to participate in rectification or restructuring of an account has an option to exit their exposure completely by selling their exposure or to new or existing lender within the prescribed time line for implication of the agreed CAP. 89. A perusal of the circular / guideline dated 26th February, 2014 issued under sections 21 and 35 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 is mandatory in nature. The Supreme Court in case of Canara Bank (supra) has held that the circulars issued by the Reserve Bank of India under section 21 and 35 of the Banking Regulation Act, are statutory in nature and are required to be complied with by the banks is not in any doubt. It is not in dispute that the petitioner bank is also bound by the statutory circulars issued by the Reserve Bank Of India under the said provision. It is an admitted position that even according to the petitioner, the petitioner was bound to form Joint ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... greement or Debtor Creditor Agreement as the case may be, has not arisen till date. I am thus not inclined to accept the submission of the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that since the petitioner had not signed the said ICA or debtor Creditor Agreement, decision taken by the JLF would not be binding upon the petitioner. 93. A perusal of the said circular also indicates that the said circular further provides that if any lender including the petitioner does not wish to be a part of such a scheme, it is bound to sell its exposure to another lender. In my view, the learned senior counsel for the respondent is right in his submission that under the said circular, it is not open to the dissenting lender to continue with its existing exposure and simultaneously not agree for rectification or restructuring as part of the corrective action plan. 94. A perusal of the record indicates that under clause 2.3 of the said circular, the account of the respondent was reported under the category as Special Mention Account-2. The said JLF was already formed by the lenders under the said circular. The petitioner had already participated in the said meetings from time to time and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... circular so as to give true and correct meaning thereof and has to interpret the circulars harmoniously. 98. In so far as the submission of the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that by the Reserve Bank of India's circular, the remedy of the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings for recovery of its dues against the borrower cannot be taken away or the petitioner cannot be forced to reduce its amount of its recovery from such borrower is concerned, it is not disputed by the petitioner that the circular issued by the Reserve Bank of India are statutory in nature and are binding on the banking companies including the petitioner. A perusal of the above referred circular clearly indicates that none of the circulars compel the banking companies to reduce its claim or not to initiate their proceedings against the borrower. 99. A perusal of the circular dated 26th February 2014 and subsequent circulars referred to aforesaid which are in continuity with the said circular indicates that all the banks which are governed by the said circular have to form JLF, all the lenders will have to monitor the asset quality closely and take corrective action for effective resol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court in the case of Sudhir Shantilal Mehta Vs.Central Bureau of Investigation, (2009) 8 SCC 1 has held that having regard to the fact that the Reserve Bank of India exercises control over the banking companies, the said circular issued by the Reserve Bank of India was binding on the banking companies. A similar view has been also taken by the Supreme Court in the case of Sardar Associates and Ors. Vs. Punjab and Sind Bank and Ors., (2009) 8 SCC 257. The Supreme Court has adverted to its judgment in the case of Central Bank of India Vs. Ravindra, (2002) 1 SCC 367 in which it was held by the Supreme Court that the power conferred by Sections 21 and 35-A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 is coupled with duty to act. The Reserved Bank of India is the prime banking institution of the country entrusted with a supervisory role over banking and conferred with the authority of issuing binding directions, having statutory force, in the interest of the public in general and preventing banking affairs from deterioration and prejudice as also to secure the proper management of any banking company generally. 103. It is held that the Reserve Bank of India is one of the watchd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us meetings held by the said JLF and the said JLF who has taken various decisions from time to time. The auditor report of the respondent is being submitted as decided in the meetings held by the said JLF. The judgment of this Court in the case of BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd. Vs. Wockhardt Ltd. (supra) is thus clearly distinguishable in the facts of this case. 106. This Court in the case of Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. Vs. Unity Infraprojects Ltd. Ors. (supra) has distinguished the judgment of this Court in the case of BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd. Vs. Wockhardt Ltd. (supra) in view of the further steps taken by the creditors to revive the borrower-company. This Court has dismissed the company petition for winding up against the borrower-company. In my view, the judgment of this Court in the case of Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. Vs. Unity Infraprojects Ltd. Ors. (supra) would assist the case of the respondent. I am respectfully bound by the said judgment. 107. I shall now decide as to whether the petitioner has made out a case for winding up of the respondent-company. Supreme Court in the case of M/s.Madhusudan Gordhandas Co. (sup ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... course. The court has wide power and discretion. It is held that inability to pay debts is required to be judged from various sets of facts and circumstances. It is held that inability to pay debts in all cases, ipso facto, could not be construed as an appropriate case for winding up. 110. It is held that even if the debt is proved and even if the inability to pay the debt is also shown, it is not a launching pad, in all cases, for a successful winding up order. Inability may arise for a variety of reasons and the court is obliged to consider whether the inability is the outcome of any deliberate or designed action or mere temporary shock and effect of economy and market. It is held that in a given case, it may happen that a party may become unable to pay its debts for a while, but that by itself is not a criterion for exercise of the power to wind up, ipso facto. 111. It is held by the Gujarat High Court in the said judgment that even dividend declared by the company regularly and having profit in the light of the profit and loss account, though temporarily, there may be inability to pay the debt or in the case of any eventuality, the company is unable to make the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the respondent that the gross value of the fixed assets of the respondent is ₹ 4,019.97 crore as on 31st March 2016. It is the case of the respondent that it employs 8325 persons and has paid all its employees their wages. The total wages paid in the Financial Year 2015-2016 aggregates to ₹ 2,11,37,00,000/-. The respondent also claims to have paid dividend till last year. The petitioner has not seriously disputed the aforesaid details asserted by the respondent. 114. In these circumstances, when 98% of the creditors in value of the total debts of the respondent have agreed to oppose this petition for winding up and have been participating in the JLF's meetings to take steps for rectification and restructuring of the respondent and some decisions taken by the said JLF are under implementation, in my view, the petition at the instance of the petitioner who claims about 1% of the total debts of the respondent cannot be entertained. In my view, an order of winding up in favour of the petitioner would not benefit the petitioner or the creditors of the respondent generally. Even if there are any chances of revival of the respondent-company which are attempted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
