Allowed

Venus Control and Switch Gears Pvt. Ltd. v. Indian Transformers Co. Ltd. Cin No. U31102MH1997PLC109955

Bombay HC30 Jan 2014CP/444/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Company court directed respondent to deposit Rs. 10 Lakhs to refer dispute to arbitration with sole arbitrator Shri. S. R. Shah. Failure to deposit results in admitting petition by publication for take-note.

What did the court decide?

Respondent to deposit Rs. 10 Lakhs; failure results in petition admission via public notice.

What the court decided

Venus Control and Switch Gears Pvt. Ltd. Vs Indian Transformers… — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

15.cp.444.12.doc

¶2

Shephali

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY PETITION NO. 444 OF 2012

¶4

Venus Control & Switch Gears Pvt. Ltd.....Petitioners
Versus
Indian Transformers Co. Ltd.
CIN NO.U31102MH1997PLC109955.....Respondents

¶5

____________

¶6

Mr. A. C. Singh, senior Advocate a/w Mr. Sanjeev Singh for the
Petitioners.

¶7

Mrs. Neeta V. Parikh fof the Respondents.

¶8

CORAM: G. S. PATEL, J.
DATED : JANUARY 30, 2014.

¶9

P.C.:

¶10

1. Heard. By consent, the following order is passed:

¶11

(a)The Respondents shall by 14th March 2014, deposit a sum of Rs.10 Lakhs with the Prothonotary and Senior Master of this Court. After 15 days of that deposit being made, the Prothonotary and Senior Master shall invest the amount so deposited in a fixed deposit in any nationalised or scheduled bank at an optimal rate of interest, initially for a period of one year.

¶12

(b)Upon the deposit being made, the disputes and differences between the parties relating to the subject

1 of 3

15.cp.444.12.doc

Shephali

matter of this Company Petition shall be referred to the
sole arbitrator, Shri. S. R. Shah. The parties shall appear
before the learned sole arbitrator within seven days
thereafter on such date and at such time as he may fix,
for preliminary directions.

¶17

(c)The Company Petition shall be treated as the statement of claim before the learned sole arbitrator. The affidavit in reply shall be treated as a reply to the statement of claim. The parties shall be at liberty, with the leave of the sole arbitrator, to adduce additional material or evidence.

¶18

(d)The learned sole arbitrator is requested to endeavour to dispose of the matter before him, before the end of August 2014. Parties agree to such extension of time as may be required by the learned sole arbitrator.

¶19

(e)The petitioners shall be at liberty to withdraw the amount so deposited, without furnishing security. If withdrawn, the amount shall be subject to the final award in the arbitration proceedings.

¶20

2. In the event that the amount as aforesaid is not deposited, the following order shall come into effect without further reference to the Court.

¶21

(a)The Company Petition shall stand admitted, returnable on 25th April 2014;

2 of 3

15.cp.444.12.doc

Shephali

(b)Mrs. Neeta Parekh, learned Advocate for the Respondents, waive service under Rule 28 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959;

¶26

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

¶27

(d)The petitioners shall deposit Rs.10,000/- toward publication charges with the Prothonotary and Senior Master, under intimation to the Company Registrar, on or before 28th March 2014, failing which the Petition shall stand dismissed for non-prosecution without further reference to the Court.

¶28

(G. S. PATEL, J.)

¶29

3 of 3

Venus Control and Switch Gears Pvt. Ltd. v. Indian Transformers Co. Ltd. Cin No. U31102MH1997PLC109955

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Venus Control and Switch Gears Pvt. Ltd. v. Indian Transformers Co. Ltd. Cin No. U31102MH1997PLC109955

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajendra S/O.Mannalal Khandelwal, Vs the Official Liquidator

Bhagwanti Changwani Vs M/S.Peacock Media Ltd., Cin NO.U22200MH2000PLC125483

Mr.Sanjeev Gupta, Sole Proprietor of M/S.Global Advertisers Vs M/S.Open Door Films Pvt.Ltd., Cin NO.U92100MH2006PTC161202

Uttar Predesh Network Private Limited Vs --

M.P. Network Private Limited Vs --

Future Value Retail Ltd. Vs ---