Allowed

L and T Finance Limited v. Duplex Industries Limited - U31300MH1990PLC058307

Bombay HC10 Jul 2014CP/515/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

,70,392.29/-, the Court admitted the petition. At final hearing, the respondent's advocate conceded the company had no objection to winding up and was insolvent. The petition was allowed.

What did the court decide?

Company wound up; Official Liquidator of High Court, Bombay appointed as Liquidator for all assets, properties, bank accounts and book debts.

L and T Finance Limited Vs Duplex Industries… — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | Bombay HC (2014)

Nitin

911-CP-515-2012

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

¶5

COMPANY PETITION NO. 515 OF 2012

¶6

L & T Finance Limited … Petitioner Versus Duplex Industries Limited … Respondent

¶7

Ms. S.I. Joshi a/w. Ms. N. Pawar i/b. S.I. Joshi & Company, for the Petitioner.

¶8

Mr. Vidya Iyer i/b. Apte & Company, for the Respondent.

¶9

CORAM: S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. DATE: 10TH JULY, 2014

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

By the above Company Petition, the Petitioner is seeking winding of Duplex Industries Limited (the Company).

¶12

After the Company Petition was filed, the Company was represented by their Advocate, who sought time to file the Affidavit in Reply on behalf of the Company. Though time was granted as sought, the Company failed and neglected to file its Affidavit in Reply and also stopped appearing before the Court by themselves and/or through their Advocates. In view thereof, this Court (Coram : N.M. Jamdar, J.) by its detailed order dated 4^th July, 2013 after inter alia recording that the sum of

¶13

2 911-CP-515-2012

¶14

Nitin

¶15

Rs. 6,94,70,392.29/- has remained unpaid by the Company to the Petitioner towards financing facilities availed by the Company from the Petitioner, admitted the above Petition and directed the same to be advertised.

¶16

The Company Petition is now taken up for final hearing.

¶17

The Learned Advocate appearing for the Company informs

¶18

the Court that the Company is not desirous of defending the Company Petition and has no objection if the Company is wound up. In view thereof, for reasons set out in the order dated 4^th July, 2013 it is established that the Company is unable to pay its debts, is commercially insolvent and deserves to be wound up. The Company Petition is, therefore, allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) and (b), which are reproduced hereunder :

¶19

“(a) That the said Respondent Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, having its Registered office at CTS No. 712/A, S. No. 140, Flat No. 2, Prachi Residency, Bhelkenagar, Kothrud, Pune-411038, Maharashtra, be wound up by an order and under the directions of this Court under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 ;

¶20

(b) That the Official Liquidator of High Court, Bombay be

¶21

Nitin

¶22

3 911-CP-515-2012

¶23

appointed as Liquidator of the said company for all its assets, properties, bank accounts and book debts with necessary powers under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956”.

¶24

The Official Liquidator is directed to forthwith act on this order without waiting for any notification, to be issued.

¶25

The Company Petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶26

( S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. )

L and T Finance Limited v. Duplex Industries Limited - U31300MH1990PLC058307

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

L and T Finance Limited v. Duplex Industries Limited - U31300MH1990PLC058307

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

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.

Gujrat Heavy Chemicals Ltd. Vs Glory Chemicals Ltd.

Henry S.W.Thum Vs Bipin Gupta

Jaypal Ramrao Kothare and Anr. Vs Kisan Vasant Pradhan and Anr.