Disposed

M/S. Nik- San Engineering Co. Ltd. v. Shri. Prakash Shah Sole Propritors of M/S Nimit Impex

Bombay HC5 Jul 2018FA/849/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a company petition regarding a commercial dispute. Parties executed consent terms during hearings. The court recorded the undertaking for payment and dismissed the First Appeal filed by the respondent as withdrawn. The petition was disposed with liberty to revive in case of default.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed with liberty to revive in case of default; First Appeal dismissed as withdrawn.

M/S. Nik- San Engineering Co. Ltd. Vs Shri. Prakash… — Company and Corporate | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

904.CP-1253-2015.doc

¶2

1/8

¶3

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

¶4

COMPANY PETITION NO.1253 OF 2015

¶5

Prakash Shah, Sole Prop. pf M/s. Nimit Impex

¶6

….Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

M/s. Nik-San Engineering Company Ltd. ….Respondent

¶9

Mr. Benny Joseph I/b. BJ Law Offices LLP for petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Chavan, authorised signatory of petitioner present. Mr. Rushil Mehta for respondent. Mr. Abhishek Choudhary, Director of respondent company present.

¶10

CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM, J. DATE : 5^th JULY 2018

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

1 Parties have entered into consent terms dated 5^th July 2018. The consent terms signed by the authorised signatory of petitioner, director of respondent and their respective advocates is taken on record and marked “X” for identification. Mr. Mehta, counsel for respondent company states that Mr. Abhishek Choudhary is authorised to sign this consent terms by the Board of Directors and he shall forward a copy of the resolution, authorising Mr. Abhishek Choudhary to sign the consent terms, to the advocate for petitioner within one week from today. Statement accepted as an undertaking to this Court.

¶13

2 Order in terms of the consent terms. All undertakings given in the consent terms are accepted and so ordered. For ease of reference,

¶14

Gauri Gaekwad

¶15

2/8 904.CP-1253-2015.doc

¶16

scanned copy of the consent terms is reproduced herein :

Gauri Gaekwad

904.CP-1253-2015.doc

3/8

Gauri Gaekwad

904.CP-1253-2015.doc

4/8

Gauri Gaekwad

904.CP-1253-2015.doc

5/8

Gauri Gaekwad

904.CP-1253-2015.doc

6/8

The six installments towards interest have been agreed to be paid every month beginning 20^th August 2018 and ending on 20^th February 2019.

¶30

3 Mr. Abhishek Choudhary, Director of respondent company assures this Court for himself personally, on behalf of the other Directors of

Gauri Gaekwad

904.CP-1253-2015.doc

7/8

the company and the company that the amounts will be paid on the dates mentioned in the consent terms. This assurance is taken as further undertaking to this Court. It is made clear that if there is any default, petitioner will be at liberty to execute this order as a decree of this Court against not only respondent company but Mr. Abhishek Choudhary in his personal capacity and all the other Directors of the company.

¶35

4 Since this petition has not been advertised, petition stands disposed with liberty to petitioner to approach this Court for revival of the petition and for further orders in case there is a default.

¶36

5 Respondent company has filed First Appeal bearing stamp no.13519 of 2018. Thought it is not part of the assignment of this Court, the counsel by consent request that this Court may take up the First Appeal for hearing now so that respondent, who is appellant in First Appeal, can withdraw the same.

¶37

6 Therefore, by consent First Appeal stamp No.13519 of 2018 is taken up for hearing and dismissed as withdrawn. Civil application nos.2147 of 2018 and 2148 of 2018 also stand disposed. Refund of court fees, if any, in accordance with rules.

¶38

7 Mr. Joseph, counsel for petitioner states that petitioner will not execute the decree, that it has obtained from the City Civil Court at

Gauri Gaekwad

904.CP-1253-2015.doc

8/8

Dindoshi in Summary Suit No.373 of 2016, so long as the installments are being paid as per the consent terms. Statement accepted.

¶43

(K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)

¶44

Gauri Gaekwad

M/S. Nik- San Engineering Co. Ltd. v. Shri. Prakash Shah Sole Propritors of M/S Nimit Impex

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Nik- San Engineering Co. Ltd. v. Shri. Prakash Shah Sole Propritors of M/S Nimit Impex

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Darooka Vs Bg Petro Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Cin No. U74999MH2013PTC241185

Schott Kaisha Pvt. Ltd. Vs Sriguru Credit Capital Services Ltd. Cin No. U65921MH1995PLC084440

The Official Liquidator High Court Bombay Vs Magnasound (I) Ltd.

Prakash Shah, Sole Prop of M/S Nimit Impex Vs M/S Nik-San Engineering Company Ltd. Cin No. U31102MH2004PLC235017

M/S. Nik- San Engineering Co. Ltd. Vs Shri. Prakash Shah Sole Propritors of M/S Nimit Impex

M/S. Nik- San Engineering Co. Ltd. Vs Shri. Prakash Shah Sole Propritors of M/S Nimit Impex