9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1760X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... panies Act, 1956, having its registered office at Hassan, Karnataka. The respondent is engaged in the business of horticulture. 3. The authorised share capital of the respondent - company is Rs. 7,00,00,000/- divided into 3,60,00,000 equity shares of Re.1/- each, amounting to Rs. 3,60,00,000/- and 34,00,000 preference shares amounting to Rs. 3,40,00,000/-. The issued, subscribed, and paid-up capital of the respondent is Rs. 3,73,69,511/- divided into 1,86,19,511 equity shares of Re.1/- each amounting to Rs. 1,86,19,511/- and a further 18,75,000 preference shares amounting to Rs. 1,87,50,000/-. The main objects, for which the respondent - company was incorporated, as set out in its Memorandum of Association, are as follows:- (a) to carry ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hin a period of seven years from the date of issue. The petitioner - company had remitted the advance share subscription money of US$ 74993.50 based on the assurances of the respondent - company. This was acknowledged at the board meeting held on 25.6.2008. The term sheet dated 13.5.2008 had set a deadline of 31.5.2008 as being the date on which the transaction had to be completed. This was not met. Accordingly, the petitioner advanced a further sum towards the share subscription money and remitted an amount of US$ 621,973, which is evidenced by a Foreign Inward Remittance Certificate dated 18.7.2008. The transaction could not be consummated and the parties agreed to terminate the transaction as of October 2008. But instead of returning t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... regard to the phenomena of global recession, the company was pleading that it be bailed out of the situation and if some reasonable time was afforded, the respondent would be in a position to discharge the debt and the respondent could not be written-off as being commercially insolvent. And especially, having regard to the large number of workmen, who would be affected by virtue of such winding up, no useful purpose would be served in the winding up order being made. However, the respondent, on that note, undertook to repay the dues to the petitioner if time is granted till March 2010. This court then passed a peremptory order holding that the failure to adhere to the order would lead to the winding-up of the respondent company. 7. The re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thereafter, there were proceedings before the BIFR after the petition was admitted and a peremptory order was passed. This would indicate that the petitioner's bona fides were not suspect and therefore, the question of adjudicating on the possible issue that might arise, by virtue of the objection filed, may not be material. Accordingly, the petitioner has certainly made out a case as to the respondent's inability to pay its debt and of commercial insolvency. Therefore, the petition stands disposed of. The respondent- Company is ordered to be wound-up under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. The Official Liquidator attached to this Court shall act as the liquidator of the respondent-Company and forthwith take charge of all the prop ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
