Dismissed

The National Small Industries Corporation Ltd. v. the Official Liquidator

Bombay HC8 Jul 2014CA/178/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court considered an application to continue and proceed with a civil suit against a company ordered to be wound up. The applicant, an unsecured creditor, sought leave under Section 446 to defend the suit personally. The court rejected the application.

What did the court decide?

Application seeking leave to continue civil suit rejected; liberty to move Official Liquidator for claim adjudication.

The National Small Industries Corporation Ltd… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

ca 178 of 2014 (919).doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY APPLICATION NO.178 OF 2014

¶3

¶4

COMPANY PETITION NO.796 OF 2005

¶5

BIFR … Petitioner and The National Small Industries Corporation Ltd. … Applicant versus Jay Electric Ltd. and Anr. … Respondents

¶6

Mr. Jayant Gaikwad, for Applicant. Ms. Pratibha, Asstt. Official Liquidator, present.

¶7

CORAM: S.J. KATHAWALLA, J.

¶8

DATE: 8^th JULY, 2014

¶9

P.C.:

¶10

The Applicant – The National Small Industries Corporation

¶11

Limited, has filed the above Company Application interalia seeking following reliefs :

¶12

(a) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to grant leave under Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956 to the Applicant to continue and proceed in the Civil Suit No.O.S.412 of 1997 before the Court of the City Civil Judge, Bangalore City against the Respondent Company;

¶13

(b) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to grant permission to join the Official Liquidator as party Defendant in Civil Suit No. O.S. 412 of 1997 before the Court of the City Civil Judge Bangalore City;

¶14

1/3

¶15

ssp

¶16

ca 178 of 2014 (919).doc

¶17

The Respondent Company M/s. Jay Electric Ltd., ( the Company) was

¶18

directed to be wound up by an order passed by this Court (Coram : A.M.Khanwilkar, J.) dated 15-10-2008 in Company Petition No.796 of 2005. The Company had filed a Reference before the BIFR under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, because of which the Official Liquidator could not take further steps in the matter.

¶19

The Applicant has filed a Suit being Civil Suit O.S.No.412 of 1997 before the Bangalore Court against the Respondent Company for recovery of a a sum of Rs.6,22,191.28 with interest thereon @ 23.5% p.a. from 01-12-1996 to 30-11-2013 amounting to Rs.24,85,654.18 and further interest @ 23.5 % p.a on Rs.6,22,191.28 from 01-12-2013 till payment and/or realization thereof.

¶20

The BIFR too has now recommended winding up of the Respondent Company. The Applicant therefore, has made the present Application seeking leave under Section 446 of the Act to continue and proceed in the Civil Suit O.S.No.412 of 1997 before the Court of City Civil Court, Bangalore City against the Respondent Company.

¶21

The Applicant is admittedly an unsecured creditor. The Official Liquidator has no funds to defend the Suit by appointment of an Advocate practicing in the Court of City Civil Judge, Bangalore. The Applicant can

¶22

2/3

¶23

ssp

¶24

ca 178 of 2014 (919).doc

¶25

always get his claim adjudicated by the Official Liquidator. In view thereof,

¶26

the Application seeking leave under Section 446 of the Act is rejected. The Applicant shall be at liberty to move the Official Liquidator and have its claim adjudicated. The Application is accordingly disposed of.

¶27

( S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. )

¶28

3/3

¶29

ssp

The National Small Industries Corporation Ltd. v. the Official Liquidator

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The National Small Industries Corporation Ltd. v. the Official Liquidator

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

Sicom Limited Vs the Official Liquidator, High Court, Bombay of Aqua Logistics Limited

Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs Bsl Ltd.

Magnet Wires and Insulations Vs Mayank Electro Limited Cin No. U31100MH1978PLC020763

M/S. Otarmal Kantilal and Co. Vs Ragini Vijay Bhtkhande

Nne Pharmaplan India Ltd.( Formerly Known a Spharmaplan India Ltd.) Vs M/S.Mission Vivacare Ltd.(Formerly Known as Mission Phar. Ltd.), Cin NO.U24230MH1993PLC072361

State of Maharashtra through Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs the Official Liquidator of M/S Chetan Foundries Ltd.