This is a company winding up petition where the petitioner claimed outstanding dues. The respondent was served but failed to appear or file an opposition. The court held the petitioner's assertions were uncontroverted and allowed the winding up petition.
The petition for winding up the respondent company was allowed.
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.514/2003.
Steelco Gujrat Ltd.
..Petitioner.
Citizen Containers Ltd.
V/s. .. Respondent.
Mr Tushar Bhavsar i/b Manoj Bhatt for the Petitioner.
None for the Respondent.
CORAM: V.C . DAGA,J.
DATED: 7TH FEBRUARY,2007.
P.C.:-
[ 2 ]
by the respondent company to the petitioner.
At no point of time, the respondent company
raised any dispute regarding quality or
quantity of the goods. Inspite of repeated
reminders the respondent company failed to pay
the amount for which the petitioner eventually
sent statutory notice dated 1st November,
2002.
| 3. The |
learned Single Judge o | f this Court |
|---|---|---|
| vide the |
order dated |
13th September, 2004 was |
| pleased to |
admit the |
petition with direction |
| to advertise |
the same |
in the "Free press |
| Journal", | "Janmabhoomi" | and "Maharashtra |
| "Government |
Gazette" at |
the cost of the |
| petitioner. | Accordingly | the petition was |
| advertised. | Inspite of |
the advertisement, the |
| respondent fai |
led to app |
ear before this Court. |
| No reply |
has been |
filed opposing this |
| petition. | In other |
words, assertions made in |
| this petition |
which ar |
e supported by the |
| documents | placed on |
record remained |
| uncontroverted | and virtua |
lly be said to have |
been admitted by the respondent by remaining
silent.
[ 3 ] failed to discharge it’s liability. The said legal presumption remained unrebutted. In this situation, this Court has no other option than to winding up the respondent company.
The petition is,thus, allowed in terms of
prayer clause (a) with no order as to costs.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petition for winding up of the company shall be allowed since the debtor failed to pay statutory dues.
Whether the respondent's failure to oppose the petition makes the petitioner's assertions uncontroverted.
What relief the Single Judge's order of admission of petition attracted.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Steelco Gujrat Ltd.
Citizen Containers Ltd.
V.C. DAGA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
