Allowed

Hindustan Petroleum Corpnltd v. Bindal Textiles Mills Ltd.

Bombay HC11 Aug 2005CP/517/1998

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the petitioner's winding-up/commercial petition filed under Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act. The respondent company failed to appear or file reply despite being served, thereby admitting the petitioner's claim that goods were supplied and payment is due and the company is unable to pay its debt.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed in terms of Prayer Clauses (a) and (b).

P.C. .	Heard counsel for the Petitioner. None	appears
for th	e respondent though served. No	reply
opposing	this petition has been filed.	According
to	Petitioner, the goods were sold, delivered	and
supplied	to the respondent company as per	its
requisitions.	The aggregate amount of	goods
supplied	between August, 1997 to September,	1997
would	be Rs.65,830/-. Inspite of	repeated
reminders,	this amount was not	received.
Eventually,	petitioner sent statutory notice to	the
respondent	company. Even that was of no avail.	In
fact	no reply was given to the statutory	notice.
Interestingly,	respondent has admitted the claim	of
the	petitioner as can be seen from	the
communicatio	n sent by respondent company to	the
petitioner	annexed to the petition.	Eventually
Petitioner	filed the present petition	under

P.C.
.

Heard
counsel
for
the
Petitioner.
None

appears

for
th

e
respondent
though
served.
No

opposing

this
petition
has
been
filed.

According

Petitioner,
the
goods
were
sold,
delivered

and

supplied

to
the
respondent
company
as
per

its

requisitions.

The
aggregate
amount
of

goods

supplied

between
August,
1997
to
September,

1997

would

be
Rs.65,830/-.
Inspite
of

repeated

reminders,

this
amount
was
not

received.

Eventually,

petitioner
sent
statutory
notice
to

the

respondent

company.
Even
that
was
of
no
avail.

fact

no
reply
was
given
to
the
statutory

notice.

Interestingly,

respondent
has
admitted
the
claim

the

petitioner
as
can
be
seen
from

the

communicatio

n
sent
by
respondent
company
to

the

petitioner

annexed
to
the
petition.

Eventually

Petitioner

filed
the
present
petition

under

Sections 433 and 434 of	the companies Act	on
12.5.1998. Before admission	of the petition,	the
respondent was duly served.	However, none	appeared
nor any reply was filed.	Eventually this court	was
pleased to admit the petition	on 19.12.1998.	The
admission of the petition	has been duly	advertised
and published. Inspite	of service, respondent	has
not chosen to appear bef	ore this court nor	any
reply is filed. In that	sense, the averments	made
in the petition have	been remained unco	ntroverted.
From the documents on reco	rd, it is amply	clear
that the respondent has	acknowledged the	liability
to pay the sum as demanded	by the Petitioner.	As
mentioned earlier, no reply	was given to	the
statutory notice or any	reply has been	filed
opposing this petition to	controvert the	assertions
made in the petition.	In that sense,	the
respondent has failed to	rebut the	legal
presumption arising that it	is unable to pay	its
debt. Viewed in this	perspective, the	petition

Sections
433
and
434
of

the
companies
Act

12.5.1998.
Before
admission

of
the
petition,

the

respondent
was
duly
served.

However,
none

appeared

nor
any
reply
was
filed.

Eventually
this
court

was

pleased
to
admit
the
petition

on
19.12.1998.

The

admission
of
the
petition

has
been
duly

advertised

and
published.
Inspite

of
service,
respondent

has

not
chosen
to
appear
bef

ore
this
court
nor

any

reply
is
filed.
In
that

sense,
the
averments

made

in
the
petition
have

been
remained
unco

ntroverted.

From
the
documents
on
reco

rd,
it
is
amply

clear

that
the
respondent
has

acknowledged
the

liability

to
pay
the
sum
as
demanded

by
the
Petitioner.

mentioned
earlier,
no
reply

was
given
to

the

statutory
notice
or
any

reply
has
been

filed

opposing
this
petition
to

controvert
the

assertions

made
in
the
petition.

In
that
sense,

the

respondent
has
failed
to

rebut
the

legal

presumption
arising
that
it

is
unable
to
pay

its

debt.
Viewed
in
this

perspective,
the

petition

Hindustan Petroleum Corpnltd v. Bindal Textiles Mills Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hindustan Petroleum Corpnltd v. Bindal Textiles Mills Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Niraj Movies Mumbai Vs M/S Bhoppie Sonie Productions and Ors.

Arunodaya Steel Industries Vs Fanesh Benzoplast Ltd.

The Global Engineering Construction Company Vs the Benliz Premises Co-Op.Soc.Ltd. and Ors.

Visen Organic Industries Ltd. Vs Colour Cartons Ltd.

Addis Packaging Vs Colour Cartons Ltd.

Vishni Narsingdas Adnani Vs Bhojwani Hotels Pvt.Ltd.