Dismissed

Ashit Kantilal Desai v. -

Bombay HC6 Feb 2008CA/142/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court rejected the applicant's prayer to recall the order approving a shareholder scheme due to the untimely filing of an objection affidavit. The court opined that the applicant's claim against the transferee company for dues is a separate matter admissible in appropriate proceedings.

What did the court decide?

None. The application was disposed of accepting the petitioner's contention that the belated objection did not warrant recalling the order.

Ashit Kantilal Desai Vs - — Company and Corporate | Bombay HC (2008)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

COMPANY APPLICATION No. 142 OF 2008 IN

¶5

COMPANY PETITION No. 854 OF 2007

¶6

Bilpower Ltd. Vs. Ashit Kantilal Desai

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

... Applicant

¶9

Mr. Rajesh Shah, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mrs. Neeta Solanki i/b Kiran Jain & Co. Applicant

¶11

CORAM : A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.

¶12

DATE : FEBRUARY 6, 2008.

¶13

PC :-

¶14

.		Heard	the counsel for the parties. The
principal		grievan	ce in this application is that
although		the	applicant had filed reply affidavit
raising	o	bjection	to the scheme propounded by the
Company,		the	said affidavit dated 17th January
2008	has	not	been considered by the Court at all.
Instead	in		paragraph 16 of the order dated 18th
January	2008		the Court has recorded that no
objection	to	the	scheme has been received from any
party.		On	this contention, it is requested that
the	order		dated 18th January 2008, allowing the

¶15

¶16

petition be recalled and the main petition be restored to the file, to be heard on merits afresh.

¶17

2.	The	grievance	made on behalf of the
applicant	clearly	overl	ooks the fact that in	terms
of or	der	dated	14th December, 2007,	the
applicant/obje	ctor	was	required to file	reply
affidavit	on	or	before 8th January	2008.
Obviously,	as	the	reply was filed beyond	the
specified	date,	the	same was not taken on	record.
Admittedly,	the	dela	y in filing reply by	the
objector	has	not	been excused by the Court.	In
absence	of	further	order by the Court	for
condoning	the	delay	in filing the reply	affidavit,

¶18

the filing of such affidavit was of no avail.

¶19

fact that the appearance of the advocate on record

¶20

was duly notified on the board.

¶21

Be that as it may, even if the contents of the affidavit dated 17th January 2008 were to be reckoned wherein it is asserted that the objector

¶22

¶23

is ent	itled to	receive some	a	mounts from	the
transferee	company,	in relation	to	the sale	deed
executed	between	the parties	in	respect of	the
immovable	property.	That	griev	ance cannot	be
taken i	nto account	in consideri	ng	the scheme	which
is propo	unded by	the company,	wh	ich relates to	the
shareholders	alone.	There is	n	o provision in	the
scheme	which	is likely to	affect	the secured	or
unsecured	creditors,	one way	or	the other.	The
grievance	of the	applicant, if	any	, will have	to
be	addressed i	n appropriate	proce	edings. This	is
so	because,	the transfe	ree	company	still
continues.	The	applicant will	be	free to	pursue
such	action	against the tran	sferee	company	for
recovery	of its	dues, as may	be	adviced. In	this

¶24

view of the matter, I find no reason to recall the

¶25

order dated 18th January 2008.

¶26

Accordingly, the application is disposed of

¶27

in above terms.

¶28

[ A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

¶29

Sd/-

Ashit Kantilal Desai v. -

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashit Kantilal Desai v. -

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sicom Ltd. Vs Rajesh J. Sarvaiya and Anr.

Mala Chuckerbutty Vs the Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai and Ors.

Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. Vs Imp Powers Ltd. and Anr.

Bgm Industrial Services Vs the Official Liquidator, High Court Bombay

Bhavana Ashit Desai Vs --

Shri Dhiraj M. Chandekar Vs the Official Liquidator of M/S. Bombay Metropolitan Transport Corpn. Ltd.