Dismissed

Spanco Limited v. Ibm India Pvt. Ltd.

Bombay HC16 Sept 2015APP/76/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a batch of company petitions concerning winding-up proceedings, the Bombay High Court unanimously dismissed appeals against the single judge’s order appointing an official liquidator. The court upheld the rejection of the appellant’s vague proposal to sell divisions of its business. The High Court held that the appellant’s claim was unconvincing and the lower court correctly determined there wa

What did the court decide?

All appeals were dismissed; notices of motion did not survive and were disposed of.

Spanco Limited Vs Ibm India Pvt. Ltd. — Execution and Attachment | Bombay HC (2015)

APPL. 681-15

-1-

VPH/bdpps

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

¶5

APPEAL (L) No. 681 OF 2015 IN

¶6

COMPANY PETITION No. 619 OF 2013

¶7

ALONGWITH NOTICE OF MOTION (L) No. 2476 OF 2015

¶8

¶9

APPEAL (L) No. 681 OF 2015

¶10

SPANCO Ltd. ... Appellant / Applicant Vs.

¶11

SREI Equipment Finance Ltd. ... Respondents

¶12

WITH

¶13

APPEAL (L) No. 682 OF 2015 IN

¶14

COMPANY PETITION No. 782 OF 2014

¶15

ALONGWITH

¶16

NOTICE OF MOTION (L) No. 2477 OF 2015 IN

¶17

APPEAL (L) No. 682 OF 2015

¶18

SPANCO Ltd.

¶19

... Appellant / Applicant

¶20

Vs.

¶21

Redington (India) Ltd. ... Respondents

¶22

WITH

¶23

APPEAL (L) No. 684 OF 2015 ALONGWITH

¶24

NOTICE OF MOTION (L) No. 2478 OF 2015

¶25

¶26

APPEAL (L) No. 684 OF 2015

¶27

SPANCO Ltd. ... Appellant / Applicant Vs.

¶28

APPL. 681-15

¶29

-2-

¶30

JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Company Pvt. Ltd.

¶31

... Respondents

¶32

WITH

¶33

APPEAL (L) No. 683 OF 2015 ALONGWITH NOTICE OF MOTION (L) No. 2479 OF 2015 IN

¶34

APPEAL (L) No. 683 OF 2015

¶35

SPANCO Ltd. Vs.

¶36

Rapid Radio Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

¶37

... Appellant / Applicant

¶38

... Respondents

¶39

WITH

¶40

APPEAL (L) No. 686 OF 2015 ALONGWITH

¶41

NOTICE OF MOTION (L) No. 2486 OF 2015 IN

¶42

APPEAL (L) No. 686 OF 2015

¶43

SPANCO Ltd. Vs.

¶44

Hewlett – Packard Financial Services (India) Pvt. Ltd.

¶45

... Appellant / Applicant

¶46

... Respondents

¶47

WITH

¶48

APPEAL (L) No. 688 OF 2015 IN

¶49

COMPANY PETITION No. 286 OF 2013 ALONGWITH NOTICE OF MOTION (L) No. 2487 OF 2015

¶50

¶51

APPEAL (L) No. 688 OF 2015

¶52

SPANCO Ltd. Vs.

¶53

... Appellant / Applicant

¶54

CISCO Systems Capital (India) Ltd. …. Respondents

APPL. 681-15

-3-

WITH

APPEAL (L) No. 689 OF 2015 IN

¶59

COMPANY PETITION No. 571 OF 2013 ALONGWITH NOTICE OF MOTION (L) No. 2488 OF 2015 IN APPEAL (L) No. 689 OF 2015

¶60

SPANCO Ltd. ... Appellant / Applicant Vs.

Barclays Bank PLC

... Respondents

WITH

APPEAL (L) No. 690 OF 2015 IN

¶65

COMPANY PETITION No. 293 OF 2014 ALONGWITH NOTICE OF MOTION (L) No. 2489 OF 2015 IN

¶66

APPEAL (L) No. 690 OF 2015

¶67

SPANCO Ltd. ... Appellant / Applicant Vs. Indusland Bank Ltd. ... Respondents

¶68

WITH

¶69

APPEAL (L) No. 687 OF 2015 IN

¶70

COMPANY PETITION No. 179 OF 2012 ALONGWITH NOTICE OF MOTION (L) No. 2490 OF 2015 IN

¶71

APPEAL (L) No. 687 OF 2015

¶72

SPANCO Ltd. Vs.

¶73

... Appellant / Applicant

¶74

Hewlett – Packard Financial

¶75

APPL. 681-15

¶76

-4-

¶77

Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. ... Respondents

¶78

WITH

¶79

APPEAL (L) No. 691 OF 2015

¶80

¶81

COMPANY PETITION No. 474 OF 2014 ALONGWITH NOTICE OF MOTION (L) No. 2491 OF 2015 IN APPEAL (L) No. 691 OF 2015

¶82

SPANCO Ltd. Vs.

¶83

... Appellant / Applicant

¶84

United Bank of India ... Respondents

¶85

WITH

¶86

APPEAL (L) No. 692 OF 2015 IN

¶87

COMPANY PETITION No. 137 OF 2013 ALONGWITH NOTICE OF MOTION (L) No. 2494 OF 2015

¶88

IN APPEAL (L) No. 692 OF 2015

¶89

SPANCO Ltd. ... Appellant / Applicant Vs. M/s. Indusland Bank Ltd. ... Respondents

¶90

... Appellant / Applicant

¶91

WITH

¶92

APPEAL (L) No. 694 OF 2015 IN

¶93

COMPANY PETITION No. 398 OF 2012 ALONGWITH

¶94

NOTICE OF MOTION (L) No. 2495 OF 2015

¶95

¶96

APPEAL (L) No. 694 OF 2015

¶97

SPANCO Ltd. - L65990 MH 1984 PLCO 32422 ... Appellant / Applicant

¶98

APPL. 681-15

¶99

-5-

¶100

Vs. Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Limited

¶101

... Respondents

¶102

WITH

¶103

APPEAL (L) No. 696 OF 2015 IN

¶104

COMPANY PETITION No. 606 OF 2014 ALONGWITH NOTICE OF MOTION (L) No. 2498 OF 2015

¶105

¶106

APPEAL (L) No. 696 OF 2015

¶107

SPANCO Ltd. - L65990 MH 1984 PLCO 32422 ...

¶108

PLCO 32422 ... Appellant / Applicant Vs. Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd. ... Respondents

¶109

WITH

¶110

APPEAL (L) No. 695 OF 2015 IN

¶111

COMPANY PETITION No. 186 OF 2012 ALONGWITH NOTICE OF MOTION (L) No. 2499 OF 2015 IN APPEAL (L) No. 695 OF 2015

¶112

SPANCO Ltd. Vs.

¶113

... Appellant / Applicant

¶114

IBM India Pvt. Ltd. ... Respondents

¶115

WITH

¶116

APPEAL (L) No. 697 OF 2015 ALONGWITH

¶117

NOTICE OF MOTION (L) No. 2500 OF 2015 IN

¶118

APPEAL (L) No. 697 OF 2015

¶119

SPANCO Ltd. ... Appellant / Applicant

¶120

APPL. 681-15

¶121

-6-

¶122

Vs. ICICI Bank Ltd. ... Respondents

¶123

¶124

Mr. Zal Andhyarujina a/w Ms. Shruti Sardesai, Ms. Jyoti Singh i/b Phoenix Legal for the Appellant in APPL 681/2015, APPL 682/2015, APPL 684/2015, APPL 683/2015, APPL 686/2015, APPL 688/2015, APPL 689/2015, APPL 690/2015, APPL 687/2015, APPL 691/2015, APPL 692/2015, APPL 694/2015, APPL 696/2015, APPL 695/2015.

¶125

Mr. Zal Andhyarujina a/w Ms. Shruti Sardesai i/b Sandip Karnik for the Appellant in APPL 697/2015.

¶126

Mr. Rohit Gupta a/w Ms. S. Gandhi, Ms. Anaisha Zachariah i/b PKA Advocates, for Respondents in APPL 681/2015.

¶127

Ms. Amrita Sarkar i/b Argus Partners, for the Respondents in APPL 682/2015.

¶128

Mr. Nikhil Rajani i/b M/s V. Deshpande & Co. for the Respondents in APPL 684/2015.

¶129

Mr. Prasad Joshi i/b I. R. Joshi & Co. for the Respondents in APPL 683/2015.

¶130

Mr Shanay Shah i/b M/s Solomon & Co. for the Respondents in APPL 686/2015 & APPL 687/2015.

¶131

Ms. Isha Abrol, for the Respondents in APPL 688/2015.

¶132

Mr. Hiren Mehta a/w Parikshit Desai, for the Respondents in PPL 689/2015.

¶133

Mr. Chirag Balsara a/w Nikhil Chandania i/b K. Ashar & Co. for the Respondents in APPL 692/2015 and 690/2015.

¶134

Mr. Rakesh L. Singh a/w Ms. Jasmine Upadhye i/b M. V. Kini & Co. for the Respondents in APPL 691/2015.

¶135

Mr. Rajesh Vanzare a/w Mr. S. B. Pawar a/w Nikita Jacob, Swati Sawant i/b S. K. Legal Associates, for the Respondents in APPL 694/2015.

¶136

Ms. Soma Singh a/w Shubro Dey i/b Vivek Sharma, for the Respondents in APPL 695/2015.

¶137

APPL. 681-15

¶138

-7-

¶139

Mr. Rohan Rajadhyaksha a/w Omkar Bhade, Debashshri Dey i/b Desai & Diwanji & Co. for Respondents in APPL. 697/015

¶140

¶141

CORAM : V. M. KANADE, & Dr. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, JJ. DATE : SEPTEMBER 16, 2015

¶142

PC.

¶143

Appellant has challenged the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 12/08/2015 whereby order of winding up of the Appellant – Company was passed and the Official Liquidator was appointed and he was directed to take charge of the assets/property of the Appellant. This order was modified by order dated 31/08/2015.

¶144

Respondent had filed Company Petition against the Appellant – Company on account of Company's inability to pay its debts. The Appellant did not dispute the fact of its inability to pay the debts. However, it was contended that instead of passing the order of winding up, the various divisions of the Company could be sold and the sale proceeds could be generated for the benefit of creditors of the Company. It is an admitted position that many creditors of the Company are unsecured creditors. The learned Single Judge, after taking into consideration the contention of the Appellant, came to the conclusion that the offer given by the Company was not acceptable since it was vague. The learned Single Judge, therefore, came to the conclusion that Respondent had clearly made out a case of the

¶145

APPL. 681-15

¶146

-8-

¶147

Appellant being commercially insolvent and there was no prospect of the Company being brought out of the financial crisis.

¶148

Mr. Andhyarujina, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant again strenuously urged that the Company, over the years, had earned goodwill in the market and also had developed its own area of expertise in certain fields. He submitted that these fields are –

¶149

(a) Power Segment (distribution);

¶150

(b) Power Segment (system Integration);

¶151

(c ) Business process outsourcing;

¶152

(d) Mobile banking;

¶153

(e) E-governance; and

¶154

(f) Network Integration.

¶155

He has elaborated the progress made by the Company in these sectors and submitted that if these Segments were offered for sale to interested parties, considerable amount would be generated from the sale of these Segments. He submitted a proposal in the form of a Chart giving particulars of development made by the Appellant in each of these Sectors. He candidly admitted that considerable amount was spent in creating the program and software technology in these Segments. He, however, was not in a position to tell us who could be the potential buyer of these Segments. He then submitted that the Company was

¶156

APPL. 681-15

¶157

-9-

¶158

awarded major contracts by Government, Public Sector Agencies etc. but on account of recession the Company had suffered financial difficulties.

¶159

On the other hand, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent submitted that this proposal was vague and, in fact, some of the creditors of the Company viz. Hewlett Packard Finance Services India Pvt Ltd and IBN India Pvt Ltd were in a better position to exploit these Sectors. He submitted that such an offer was never given to these Creditors. It is an admitted position that total liability of the Company is over Rs 468 crores.

¶160

In our view, the submission made by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant though appears to be attractive, on a closer scrutiny from the proposal which is given it can be seen that this proposal cannot become successful if ground realities are taken into consideration. Moreover, the said proposal is very vague and has been submitted in a very generalised terms. The learned Single Judge, therefore, has rightly rejected the said submission of the learned Counsel for the Appellant.

¶161

Mr. Andhyarujina, the learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant relied on the Judgment of the Apex Court in Shankarlal

¶162

APPL. 681-15

¶163

-10-

¶164

Aggarwala and Others vs. Shankarlal Poddar and Others¹ and also on the Judgment of the Gujarat High Court in Tata Iron and Steel Co. vs. Micro Forge (India) Ltd.² He also relied upon the judgment of Chancery Division in Great Western (Forest Of Dean) Coal Consumers' Company³ . There cannot be any dispute about the proposition and the ratio laid down in these judgments. However, in our view, taking into consideration the factual matrix of the present case, ratio of these judgment would not apply to the facts of the present case.

¶165

We do not see any infirmity in the order passed by the learned Single Judge. We are therefore not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. All these appeals are therefore dismissed. Since all these Appeals are dismissed, Notices of Motion taken out therein do not survive and they are also disposed of accordingly.

¶166

[Dr. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.] [V. M. KANADE, J.]

¶167

1 (1964) 1 SCR 717 : AIR 1965 SC 507: (1965) 45 Com cas 1

¶168

2 2001 (Vol.104) Company Cases 533.

¶169

3 Vol.XXI Chancery Division 769

Spanco Limited v. Ibm India Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Spanco Limited v. Ibm India Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ms.Anindita Vs Shri.Gopal Shetty

Jagannath S. Vaithy Vs Court Receiver High Courtbombay and Ors.

Union of India and Ors. Vs Ramndeep Textiles Mills

Spanco Limited Vs Icici Bank Limited

Spanco Ltd. (CIN-L65990MH1984PLC032422) Vs Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd.

Spanco Limited - L65990MH1984PLC032422 Vs Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Limited