Higher Court allowed the petition for winding up the respondent company for being unable to pay its debts, noting the unchallenged outstanding claim amounting to nearly Rs. 46.76 lakhs.
The petition for winding up of the Respondent Company is made absolute.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
-: 1 :-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
COMPANY PETITION NO. 693 OF 2000
M/s. ICDS Limited. ...... .... Petitioners.
Versus
M/s. RSL Industries Ltd..... .... Respondent.
Mr. S. P. Bharati for the Petitioners.
CORAM: A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.
DATE : 2ND AUGUST, 2005
P.C.:
Heard Counsel for the Petitioners. None appears
for the Respondents, though served. No reply has been
filed opposing this petition.
2. The Petitioners are a financial institution. The
Petitioners provided Hire Purchase facility to the
Respondent Company as requested by them in respect of
pollution control equipment. The Respondent Company was
liable to pay the outstanding amount to the Petitioners
along with interest in the sum of Rs.46,76,818.40 which
consisted of Rs.21,41,760/- being balance under Hire
Purchase Agreement and Rs.25,35,058.40 as overdue
compensation charges under the terms of the agreement.
As the amount was not received inspite of repeated
-: 2 :-
reminders, the Petitioners issued statutory notice on
10th December, 1999 which was duly served upon the
Respondent Company. No reply was given to this
statutory notice.
3. In the circumstances, the present petition under
Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act came to be
filed by the Petitioners on 7th April, 2000. This
petition was admitted on 21st February, 2001. The
Petition has been duly advertised and published. It is
stated across the Bar that even thereafter no attempt
was made by the Respondent Company to offer any amount
much less huge outstanding claim of the Petitioners, as
mentioned earlier, nor any reply has been filed
controverting the assertion raised in the petition. In
other words, the assertion made in the petition, which
are supported by the documents placed on record, have
remained unchallenged. It necessary follows that the
Respondent Company has failed to rebut. In that sense
the legal presumption against the Respondent Company
arises that it is unable to pay its debts. In that
situation, this Court has no option but to allow the
prayer of the Petitioner for winding up of the
Respondent Company.
4. Accordingly, this petition is made absolute in terms
of prayer clauses (a) and (b).
-: 3 :-
Sd/-
(A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the respondent company is unable to pay its debts and liable to be wound up under the Companies Act.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s. ICDS Limited
M/s. RSL Industries Ltd
A. M. KHANWILKAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court