TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1538X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... care of. Again there is no denial of the dues of the petitioner. No communication or document is sought to be placed on record whereby the respondent in the past had informed the petitioner of its failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the purchase order. There is not even one document place on record to show that the petitioner were informed that they have failed to adhere to the terms and conditions of the purchase orders or that the work being performed by them is defective. In fact what the learned counsel for the respondent has relied upon is a communication dated 31.07.2014 allegedly written by the respondent regarding some defects. This communication has been attached by the petitioner themselves. This is the solitary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l of this Court. If such amount is deposited the petitioner would be free to have the said amount released - CO.PET. 812/2015 - - - Dated:- 3-8-2018 - MR. JAYANT NATH J. Petitioner Through Mr. Kunal Kalra and Mr. Ankur Aggarwal, Advs. Respondent Through Ms. Nanda Devi and Mr. S.K. Jha, Advs. JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. This petition is filed under section 433(e), 434 (a) read with section 439(b) of the Companies Act, 1956 seeking to wind up the respondent company. The petitioner submits that it was approached by the respondent company for displaying some of the outdoor advertisement. Purchase orders were placed by the respondent company on 10.6.2014. Between July, 2014 to November, 2014 the petitioner states that he has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... structure Pvt.Ltd. . It was stated by the respondent that there was shortage of funds in the respondent company. Hence, in deference to the wishes of the respondent company a consolidated invoice for ₹ 53,66,278/- (excluding service tax) was issued in the name of Ambience Projects and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. . 4. Learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently denied the dues. She states that the dues are bonafidely disputed. She has taken me through Annexure P-5 of the petition where an extract from some email written by the petitioner has been reproduced stating that the petitioner is expecting the bill of ₹ 53,66,278/- to be cleared within a week. She has also relied upon an email dated 31.7.2014 where the respondents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the agreed/approved size and location under the agreements including Raja Garden and DND Flyover Delhi to Noida. It is further stated that the petitioner never provided the services as per the agreements and failed to change the damaged flexes within the agreed time. These pleas are being taken in the reply bereft of any document or detail. No communication or document is sought to be placed on record whereby the respondent in the past had informed the petitioner of its failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the purchase order. There is not even one document place on record to show that the petitioner were informed that they have failed to adhere to the terms and conditions of the purchase orders or that the work being performe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it is manifest that some amount does remain payable by the respondent to the petitioner. 10. In Madhusudan Gordhandas Co. Vs. Madhu Wollen Industries Pvt. Ltd., AIR 1971 SC 2600 the Supreme Court held as follows:- 22.....Where however there is no doubt that the company owes the creditor a debt entitling him to a winding up order but the exact amount of the debt is disputed the court will make a winding up order without requiring the creditor to quantity the debt precisely (See Re. Tweeds Garages Ltd. [1962] Ch. 406.... 11. In view of the above legal position, I admit the present petition. However I defer appointing the OL as the PL till the next date of hearing. 12. In the meantime, the respondent is free to depos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
