Disposed

Vikas Shantilal Doshi Prop.of M/S. Rajendra Industrial Corporation v. M/S. R.J. Paper Mills Private Limited - U21000MH2003PTC142584

Bombay HC13 Feb 2014CP/193/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

No issues were identified. The matter was settled and compromised via consent terms signed by both parties. The court modified a clause of the consent terms by consent and disposed of the company petition accordingly.

What did the court decide?

The company petition was disposed of in terms of the modified consent terms, including the appointment of the Official Liquidator as provisional liquidator.

Vikas Shantilal Doshi Prop.of M/S. Rajendra Industrial… — Company and Corporate | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

CP193-13.DOC

¶2

agk

¶3

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

COMPANY PETITION NO.193 OF 2013

¶5

Vikas Shantilal Doshi, Proprietor of
M/s. Rajendra Industrial Corporation..Petitioner.

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s. R.J. Paper Mills Private Limited

¶8

..Respondents.

¶9

Mr. Jagdish Nagar i/by M/s. Jagdish Nagar & Associates, for the Petitioner.
Ms. Sneha Goyal i/by M/s. Divya Shah Associates, for the Respondents.

¶10

CORAM : G.S. Patel, J. Thursday, 13th February 2014.

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

1.The matter has been settled and compromised. Consent terms have
been signed. These are tendered on record and marked 'X' for identification.
They are signed by the advocates for the respective parties. The petitioner
himself has signed the terms, and on behalf the respondent – Company, one
Mr. Sanjay Desai, a Director has signed the terms.

¶13

2.There will be an order in terms of the consent terms. The undertakings
given in the consent terms are accepted as undertakings to this Court.

¶14

1 of 3

¶15

CP193-13.DOC

¶16

3. By consent, clause (6) of the consent terms is modified as follows :

¶17

“6. In the event, the respondent – company commits three successive defaults in making the payment and/or realization of the installments or in the last installment then in that event:

¶18

(a) The company petition shall revive and stand automatically admitted upon the dishonor of that installment being communicated by the advocate for the petitioner to the Company Registrar of this Court. It shall then be made returnable after four weeks of the date of such communication. Service of the Petition under Rule 28 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 shall be deemed to have been waived.

¶19

(b) The petition shall then be advertised in two local newspapers, namely, (i) Free Press Journal (in English); (ii) Navshakti (in Marathi); as also in the Maharashtra Government Gazzette.

¶20

(c) The petitioner shall, within two weeks of such communication to the Company Registrar, deposit an amount of Rs.10,000/towards publication charges with the Prothonotary & Senior Master, under intimation to the Company Registrar, failing which the petition shall stand dismissed for non-prosecution without further reference to the Court.

¶21

(d) The Official Liquidator shall be appointed as a provisional liquidator of the assets and properties of the Company.”

¶22

2 of 3

¶23

CP193-13.DOC

¶24

3. This substitution has been agreed to by the learned advocates for both the parties, as also their respective clients who are personally present in Court.

¶25

4. The company petition is disposed of in these terms.

¶26

(G.S. Patel, J.)

¶27

3 of 3

Vikas Shantilal Doshi Prop.of M/S. Rajendra Industrial Corporation v. M/S. R.J. Paper Mills Private Limited - U21000MH2003PTC142584

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas Shantilal Doshi Prop.of M/S. Rajendra Industrial Corporation v. M/S. R.J. Paper Mills Private Limited - U21000MH2003PTC142584

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Poss Desa and Anr. Vs Yogendra Kumar Modi and Ors.

Arvji Industries through Its Proprietor Shri Nilesh Sardesi Vs Sterling Biotech Ltd, Cin NO.L51900MH1985PLC035738

Layon International Pvt.Ltd. Vs Krum Alloys Industries Pvt.Ltd. Cin NO.U27320MH1997PTC108402

Shantilal Mishrimal Doshi Prop.of M/S. Guru Gautam Steels Vs M/S. R.J. Paper Mills Private Limited - U21000MH2003PTC142584

Shekhar M.Shetty Vs Prabhakar M.Shetty and Anr.

Ratan Singh Rana Vs Oilco Services (India) Ltd. - U74999MH1999PLC121514