Allowed

Silver Light Nirlepware Pvt.Ltd. v. Silver Light Nirlepware Industries P.Ltd.With Duraware Pvt.Ltd.

Bombay HC10 Feb 2005CP/637/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court considered objections filed by two creditors who failed to appear despite notice being issued on 23.12.2004. Rejecting the objections based on their non-appearance, the court made the petitions for amalgamation absolute in accordance with the prayers filed.

What did the court decide?

The petitions were made absolute in terms of prayers clause (a) to (g), and the scheme of amalgamation was approved despite creditor objections.

Silver Light Nirlepware Pvt.Ltd. Vs Silver Light… — Company and Corporate | Bombay HC (2005)

¶1

:1:

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATUARE AT BOMBAY
 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION’

¶3

 COMPANY PETITION NO. 638 OF 2004
 CONNECTED WITH
 COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 126 OF 2004

¶4

 In the matter of the Companies
 Act, I of 1956
 AND
 In the matter of sections 391 to
 394 of the Companies Act, 1956
 AND
 In the matter of the scheme of
 amalgamation of Silver Light
 Nirlepware Industies Private
 Limited with Duraware Private
 Limited.

¶5

 Duraware Private Limited .... Petitioner

¶6

ALONGWITH

¶7

COMPANY PETITION NO. 637 OF 2004
CONNECTED WITH
COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 125 OF 2004

¶8

 In the matter of the Companies
 Act, I of 1956
 AND
 In the matter of sections 391 to
 394 of the Companies Act, 1956
 AND
 In the matter of the scheme of
 amalgamation of Silver Light
 Nirlepware Industies Private
 Limited with Duraware Private
 Limited.

¶9

 Silver Light Nirlepware Industsries

¶10

:2:

¶11

 Private Limited .....Petitioner

¶12

 Shri Rahul Risbud for the petitioner in both the petitions.

¶13

 Shri C.J. Roy with R.C. Master and M.M. Goswami Panel
 counsels i/b. T.C. Kaushik for Regional Director, Dept. of
 Company Affairs, Maharashtra, Mumbai in both the petitions.

¶14

 Shri R..C. Gupta, official Liquidator prsent in

¶15

 C.P.637/2004 only.

¶16

CORAM: S.U. KAMDAR, J.

¶17

DATE : 10TH FEBRUARY, 2005.

¶18

P.C. :

¶19

 1. In the present case two of the creditors have
 filed their objections namely one Mrs. Ashwini Tatke and
 Mrs. Mansi Mhaskar that though the objections are filed
 the said creditors are not appearing in the present
 proceedings. On the last occasion I directed a special
 notice to be issued to the said creditors. An affidavit of
 service has been filed indicating that a notice has been
 issued to the said creditors for the hearing of the matter

¶20

:3:

¶21

 on 23.12.2004 when the said matter was finally heard.
 However, none appeared for the said creditors and pressed
 for the said objection. In the light of the aforesaid
 facts of the matter I reject the objections raised by the
 said creditors. For the reasons recorded in Company
 Petition no. 695 of 2004 and Company Petition no. 696 of
 2004, the petition is made absolute in terms of prayer

¶22

 clause (a) to (g).

¶23

 sd/-

¶24

 **************

Silver Light Nirlepware Pvt.Ltd. v. Silver Light Nirlepware Industries P.Ltd.With Duraware Pvt.Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Silver Light Nirlepware Pvt.Ltd. v. Silver Light Nirlepware Industries P.Ltd.With Duraware Pvt.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

Mr Dominic Abraham Rodrigues Mrs Valetine Rodrigues Vs

Jindal Vijaynagar Steel Ltd. Vs David James and Sons

Kuldipkumar J. Kapoor Vs Legal Heirs of Jogindarnath H. Kapoor and Ors.

Madhukar Kamba Patil and Ors. Vs Official Liquidator High Court

Egale Industries Vs Vir Alloys and Steel Co. Pvt. Ltd.

Duraware Private Limited Vs Silver Light Nirlepwasre Industries Pvt.Ltd.With Duraware Pvt.Ltd.