Partly allowed

Riyassudin Mohammedali Khot and Another v. New Haven Steel Ball Corporation Pvt. Ltd.

Bombay HC6 Nov 2017CA/337/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge in the Bombay High Court disposed of multiple company applications. Applications for appointment of committee of inspection and inspection of books were allowed. An application for verification of balance sheet was dismissed. A case on payment of a report was adjourned.

What did the court decide?

Applications CA/467/2016, CA/377/2013, and CA/337/2017 allowed; CA/422/2012 dismissed; CA/329/2017 adjourned.

Riyassudin Mohammedali Khot and Another Vs New Haven… — Company and Corporate | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

27.cp.883.2009==.doc

¶3

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

¶4

COMPANY PETITION NO. 883 OF 2009

¶5

M/s. Girdharilal Agrawal & Co. .. Petitioner

¶6

Vs.

¶7

New Haven Steel Ball Corporation Pvt. Ltd.

¶8

.. Respondent

¶9

WITH

¶10

COMPANY PETITION NO. 11 OF 2011

¶11

Hwaseung Exwill Co. Ltd. .. Petitioner

¶12

Vs.

¶13

New Haven Steel Ball Corporation Pvt. Ltd.

¶14

.. Respondent

¶15

WITH

¶16

COMPANY PETITION NO. 74 OF 2011

¶17

M/s. Madhur Engineers Pvt. Ltd. .. Petitioner

¶18

Vs.

¶19

New Haven Steel Ball Corporation Pvt. Ltd. .. Respondent

¶20

WITH COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 251 OF 2011 IN

¶21

COMPANY PETITION NO. 883 OF 2009

¶22

Sunil Dhirajlal Mehta .. Applicant

¶23

Vs.

¶24

The O.L. of New Haven Steel Ball Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (in liqn.) .. Respondent

¶25

WITH COMPANY PETITION NO. 336 OF 2012

¶26

Phoolchand Jain .. Petitioner

¶27

Vs.

¶28

New Haven Steel Ball Corporation Pvt. Ltd. .. Respondent

1/6

Shraddha Talekar PS

27.cp.883.2009==.doc

WITH COMPANY PETITION NO. 337 OF 2012

¶34

SMC Stainless Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Vs.

¶35

New Haven Steel Ball Corporation Pvt. Ltd.

¶36

.. Petitioner

¶37

.. Respondent

¶38

WITH COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 422 OF 2012 IN COMPANY PETITION NO. 883 OF 2009

¶39

Mr. Milan Mehta, Ex-Director of New Haven steel Ball Corporation Pvt. Ltd.

¶40

.. Applicant

¶41

Vs. The O.L. of New Haven Steel Ball Corporation Pvt. Ltd.(in liqn.) .. Respondent

¶42

WITH COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 8 OF 2013 IN

¶43

COMPANY PETITION NO. 883 OF 2009

¶44

Canara Bank .. Applicant

¶45

Vs. The O.L. of New Haven Steel Ball Corporation Pvt. Ltd.(in liqn.) .. Respondent

¶46

WITH COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 377 OF 2013 IN

¶47

COMPANY PETITION NO. 883 OF 2009

¶48

M/s. D.I. Steel Pvt. Ltd. .. Applicant

¶49

Vs. The O.L. of New Haven Steel Ball Corporation Pvt. Ltd.(in liqn.) .. Respondent

2/6

Shraddha Talekar PS

27.cp.883.2009==.doc

WITH COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 467 OF 2016 IN

¶55

COMPANY PETITION NO. 883 OF 2009

¶56

Tax Recovery Office Range Mumbai Vs. The O.L. of New Haven Steel Ball Corporation Pvt. Ltd.(in liqn.)

¶57

.. Applicant

¶58

.. Respondent

¶59

WITH COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 329 OF 2017 IN

¶60

COMPANY PETITION NO. 74 OF 2011

¶61

M/s. Kavis Fashions M/s. D.I. Steel Pvt. Ltd.

¶62

.. Applicant

¶63

Vs.

¶64

The O.L. of New Haven Steel Ball Corporation Pvt. Ltd.(in liqn.)

¶65

.. Respondent

¶66

WITH COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 337 OF 2017 IN

¶67

COMPANY PETITION NO. 883 OF 2009

¶68

Riyassudin Mohammedali Khot & Anr. .. Applicants Vs.

¶69

The O.L. of New Haven Steel Ball Corporation Pvt. Ltd.(in liqn.) .. Respondent

¶70

Mr.G.B. Kedia for petitioner in CP/74/2011.

¶71

Mr.Chandran Singh Shekhawat i/b ALMT Legal for petitioner in CP/336/2012 & CP/337/2012.

¶72

Mr. S.P. Kanuga for applicant in CA/377/2012.

¶73

Mr.Suresh Kumar for applicant in CA/467/2016.

¶74

Mr.Vijay B. Kanoria for applicant in CA/329/2016.

3/6

Shraddha Talekar PS

27.cp.883.2009==.doc

Mr.Vachan Bodke i/b M/s. Chitnis Vaithy and Co. for applicant in CA/337/2017.

¶80

None for applicant in CA/8/2013.

¶81

None for applicant in CA/422/2012.

¶82

Mr.Mahendhar Aithe-Company Prosecutor for official liquidator present.

¶83

CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM, J. DATE : 6^TH NOVEMBER 2017

¶84

P.C.

¶85

COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 467 OF 2016 AND COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 377 OF 2013 AND COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 337 OF 2017 IN COMPANY PETITION NO. 883 OF 2009

¶86

1 Mr.Kanuga appearing in company application No. 377 of 2012,

¶87

Mr.Bodke appearing in company application No. 337 of 2017 and Mr. Suresh Kumar appearing in company application No. 467 of 2016 for respective Ex-Directors have no objection. The official liquidator also has no objection.

¶88

2 Therefore, the above company applications allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b) and accordingly disposed.

4/6

Shraddha Talekar PS

27.cp.883.2009==.doc

COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 422 OF 2012 IN COMPANY PETITION NO. 883 OF 2009

¶94

3 None for applicant.

¶95

Application dismissed.

¶96

WITH COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 8 OF 2013

¶97

4 Without the assistance of applicant, who is not present today, this application is taken up for hearing.

¶98

The official liquidator has no objection if the application is allowed.

¶99

5 Therefore, the company application allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b) and accordingly disposed.

¶100

COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 329 OF 2017 IN

¶101

COMPANY PETITION NO. 74 OF 2011

¶102

6 The Official Liquidator states that applicant herein has to pay an amount of Rs. 34 crores to the company and an Official Liquidator's Report has already been prepared and copy served upon applicant to which there is no reply.

¶103

Mr. Kanoria for applicant states his reply to the OLR is ready and will be filed during the course of today.

5/6

Shraddha Talekar PS

27.cp.883.2009==.doc

7 Stand over to 6^th December 2017.

¶109

It is clarified that the Ex-Directors shall personally remain present in

¶110

Court on the next date.

¶111

(K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)

¶112

6/6

¶113

Shraddha Talekar PS

Riyassudin Mohammedali Khot and Another v. New Haven Steel Ball Corporation Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Riyassudin Mohammedali Khot and Another v. New Haven Steel Ball Corporation 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

Balbir Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs Lavasa Corporation Ltd. Cin No. U55101MH2000PLC187834

Innovision Limited Vs Essar Project (India) Limited

M/S.Pba Infrastructure Ltd. Vs Maharahstra Airport Development Company Ltd.

M/S. Serum Institute of India Ltd. Vs Hiran Orgochem Ltd. - L51900MH1983PLC020596

Dattram Pednekar Vs the Official Liquidator of Hes Ltd. (in Liqn)

M/S. Serum Institute of India Ltd. Vs Hiran Orgochem Ltd. - L51900MH1983PLC020596