Disposed

Rmg Law Associates v. M/S. Bansari Investments and Finance Pvt. Ltd. Cin NOU65990MH1990PTC058374

Bombay HC11 Aug 2016CA/423/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a Company Petition and accompanying Company Application based on a consent settlement agreement filing that provided for full and final payment of a sum.

What did the court decide?

Disposal of Company Petition and Company Application in terms of consent terms; liberty to apply for appropriate orders on default.

Rmg Law Associates Vs M/S. Bansari Investments and… — Company and Corporate | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

chamber.cpl.578.2016.doc

¶2

dik

¶3

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

¶4

COMPANY PETITION (L) NO. 578 OF 2016 WITH COMPANY APPLICATION (L) NO. 525 OF 2016 IN COMPANY PETITION (L) NO. 578 OF 2016

¶5

RMG Law Associates ...Petitioner vs Bansari Investments & Finance Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent

¶6

Mr Mohammed Himayatullah a/w Ms Rujuta Patil a/w Ms Niyathi Kalra i/b Negandhi Shah & Himayatullah for the Petitioner Mr Dilip Kulkarni i/b Chitnis & Co. for the Respondent

¶7

Mr Hemang Raythatta, Mr Sunil Gangan, Mr Jayesh Mistry representative of the Petitioner.

¶8

Mr Girish Purohit, Authorized Representative of the Respondent present.

¶9

CORAM : B. P. COLABAWALLA J.

¶10

AUGUST 11, 2016

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

The parties have settled their dispute in this Company Petition by filing the consent terms dated 11 August, 2016. These consent terms have been signed by a partner of the Petitioner as well as the Authorized Signatory of the Respondent Company as well as their respective advocates. The Authorized Signatory of the Respondent Company, Mr Girish Purohit is also present in Court today. The consent terms provide that the Petitioners have agreed to

¶13

Pg 1 of 2

¶14

chamber.cpl.578.2016.doc

¶15

accept the amount of Rs.30,00,000/- in full and final settlement, provided the same is paid within a period of five months and in the manner set out in paragraph 2 of the consent terms. The consent terms further provide that in the event of any one default in the payment, the Respondent Company would be liable to pay the entire sum of Rs.41,88,915/- to the Petitioner and this Company Petition would stand admitted. In such an event the Petitioners are granted liberty to move this Court for the appropriate orders regarding the advertisement of the Company Petition etc.

¶16

2 The consent terms are taken on record and marked “X” for identification. The statements and undertakings contained therein are accepted. The Company Petition is disposed of in terms of the consent terms with liberty to the Petitioners to apply, in the event of any default as contemplated in the said consent terms. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. In view of disposal of the Company Petition, nothing survives in the Company Application and the same is disposed of accordingly.

¶17

( B. P. COLABAWALLA J. )

¶18

Pg 2 of 2

Rmg Law Associates v. M/S. Bansari Investments and Finance Pvt. Ltd. Cin NOU65990MH1990PTC058374

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rmg Law Associates v. M/S. Bansari Investments and Finance Pvt. Ltd. Cin NOU65990MH1990PTC058374

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Basava Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S the Bombay Dyeing and Manugacturing Co. Ltd. Cin L17120MH1879PLC000037

M/S Bansal Cement Pvt. Ltd. Vs Murli Industries Ltd. Cin No. L01110MH1991PLC064271

M/S Bansal Cement Pvt. Ltd. Vs Murli Industries Ltd. Cin No. L01110MH1991PLC064271

Sandeep Steels Vs Pramatic Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.

Rmg Law Associates Vs M/S. Bansari Investments and Finance Pvt. Ltd. Cin NOU65990MH1990PTC058374

Sandeep Steels Vs Pragmatic Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd., Cin NO.U45200MH2004PLC150228