Single judge order disposing of a winding up petition against Octamec Engineering Limited. Court found the company unable to pay debts and passed orders for winding up and appointment of liquidator.
Winding up of the company ordered and appointment of Official Liquidator granted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
63.CP-229-2014
1/3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
COMPANY PETITION NO.229 OF 2014
Amrish Shashikumar Vedak ….Petitioner V/s. Octamec Engineering Limited ….Respondent
Mr. N.G. Chhatre a/w. Ms. Swati P. Sutar for the petitioner. None for the respondent.
Ms. Pratibha Ramaswamy, Assistant Official Liquidator present.
CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM,J DATE : 24th FEBRUARY, 2016
P.C.:-
1 The Assistant Official Liquidator states that the company is already ordered to be wound up in Company Petition No.548 of 2014 by an order dated 26th February, 2015. The counsel for the present petitioner states that the claim of the petitioner in Company Petition No.548 of 2014, as per their information, has been settled. The Assistant Official Liquidator states that the order of winding up passed on 26th February, 2015 has not been recalled. Therefore, technically the winding up proceedings are still on going.
2 In any event, the counsel for the petitioner states that in compliance with the order dated 30th November, 2015, the admission of the petition has been advertised in Free Press Journal (in English) and
Gauri Gaekwad
2/3 63.CP-229-2014
Navshakti (in Marathi) as also in Maharashtra Government Gazette. In the newspapers it was published on 6th January, 2016, respectively and in the Maharashtra Government Gazette the notification was issued for the period from 21st January, 2016 to 27th January, 2016. The petitioner has also filed an affidavit of one Swati Sutar affirmed on 22nd February, 2016 confirming service.
3 As regards the notice issued under Rule 28 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, it appears from the service report that the packet that was sent to the Company's Sakinaka address has been delivered on 21st December, 2015 and the packet that was sent to Vile Parle address has been returned undelivered with the endorsement “left”.
4 The company has not filed any reply despite service. Nobody is also present today to oppose the petition. I am satisfied that the company is unable to pay its debts. The petition, therefore, is disposed in terms of prayer clauses – (a) and (b), which read as under :-
(a) That the respondent company Octamec Engineering Limited be wound up under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 by and under the order and directions of this Hon'ble Court;
(b) That the Official Liquidator of this Hon'ble Court or some other fit and proper person be appointed as the Liquidator of the respondent company with all the necessary powers under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956.”
Gauri Gaekwad
63.CP-229-2014
3/3
5 Order accordingly.
6 The Official Liquidator shall forthwith act on a copy of this order without waiting for any notification.
(K.R.SHRIRAM,J)
Gauri Gaekwad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner company should be wound up under the Companies Act, 1956 and an Official Liquidator appointed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Amrish Shashikumar Vedak
Octamec Engineering Limited
K.R. Shriram
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
