Disposed

M/S. Vipul Bright Steels Pvt. Ltd. v. Duke`S Corporation Ltd.(Formerly Known as Uma Precision Ltd.)U 29299MH1994PLC081578

Bombay HC18 Mar 2014CP/9/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment disposes of a company petition based on consent terms signed by party representatives. Clause 8 of the terms was modified to prescribe consequences for payment defaults, including reviving the petition, waiving service, appointing a provisional liquidator, and conditions for advertisement. The petition was disposed of in accordance with these terms.

What did the court decide?

The company petition is disposed of in accordance with the signed consent terms, including the amended Clause 8 regarding default mechanisms.

M/S. Vipul Bright Steels Pvt. Ltd. Vs Duke`S… — Company and Corporate | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

16-CP-9-13.DOC

¶2

Shephali

¶3

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

¶4

COMPANY PETITION NO. 9 OF 2013

¶5

M/s. Vipul Bright Steels Pvt. Limited.…Petitioners
Versus
Duke's Corporation Ltd. (formerly known as …Respondents
Uma Precision Ltd.)

¶6

Mr. Sugandh Deshmukh for the Petitioners.
Mr. Ajit Kocharekarfor the Respondents.

¶7

CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: MARCH 18, 2014

¶8

PC:-

¶9

1.This matter has been settled. Consent terms are tendered.
These consent terms have been signed by: (a) the Advocates for the
parties; (b) one Laxmikant S. Narandar, director of the petitioners;
and (c) one Suresh S. Ingale, authorised signatory of the
Respondents. Both Mr. Narandar and Mr. Ingale are present in
Court. The consent terms are taken on record and marked ‘X’ for
identification. Undertakings in the consent terms are accepted as
undertakings to this court.

¶10

2.By consent, Clause 8 of the consent terms is modified and
substituted as follows:

¶11

1 of 2

¶12

16-CP-9-13.DOC

¶13

“8. In the event the respondents commit a single default in payment of any of the above instalments:

¶14

(a) The petition shall thereupon revive and stand admitted without further reference to the Court, and made returnable within four weeks from the date of such default.

¶15

(b) Service of the petition under Rule 28 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 shall be deemed to have been waived.

¶16

(c) The petition shall be advertised in two local newspapers, namely, (i) Free Press Journal (in English), and (ii) Navshakti (in Marathi) as also in (iii) the Maharashtra Government Gazette.

¶17

(d) The petitioners shall deposit Rs.10,000/toward publication charges with the Prothonotary and Senior Master, under intimation to the Company Registrar, within two weeks from the date of default, failing which the Petition shall stand dismissed for non-prosecution without further reference to the Court.”

¶18

3.In addition, in the event of such default, the Official
Liquidator shall stand appointed as the Provisional Liquidator of
the assets of the respondent-Company. The petitioners would then
be entitled to retain those assets that have been given to the
petitioners under the earlier agreement dated 7th August 2013 and
the amount paid pursuant to the settlement agreement dated 16th
March 2014.

¶19

4.The company petition is disposed of in accordance with of
the consent terms.

¶20

(G. S. PATEL, J.)

¶21

2 of 2

M/S. Vipul Bright Steels Pvt. Ltd. v. Duke`S Corporation Ltd.(Formerly Known as Uma Precision Ltd.)U 29299MH1994PLC081578

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Vipul Bright Steels Pvt. Ltd. v. Duke`S Corporation Ltd.(Formerly Known as Uma Precision Ltd.)U 29299MH1994PLC081578

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

Enam Insurance Broker Private Limited Vs -

Enam Resources Private Limited Vs -

Reema Business Services Private Limited Vs -

M/S Grindwell Norton Ltd. Vs 0

M/S. Saint-Gobain Sekurit India Limited. Vs ----

Rohit and Company Vs Loha Ispaat Ltd.