Allowed

M/s Parity Consumer Care Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s Minwool Rock Fibres Ltd.

Chhattisgarh HC17 Aug 2020COMP/3/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petition for winding up was withdrawn by the petitioner after an amicable settlement during the pendency of the petition. The application for leave to withdraw the petition under Rule 100(1) and (2) of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 was allowed after the advertised hearing date had passed, and the petition was accordingly disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to withdraw the winding up petition.

M/s Parity Consumer Care Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/s Minwool Rock Fibres Ltd. — Chhattisgarh HC (2020) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

COMP No. 3 of 2015

¶5

M/s Parity Consumer Care Pvt. Ltd. A Company Incorporated Under The Relevant Provisions Of The Companies Act. 1956 Having Its Registered Office At 55-4-187/ 3and4, Iind Floor, Soham Mansion M.G. Road, Secunderabad-500003, Civil And Rev. District Hyderabad A.P., Andhra Pradesh .

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s Minwool Rock Fibres Ltd. S/o A Company Incorporated Under The Relevant Provisions Of The Companies Act. 1956, Having Its Registered Office At Village-Rewagahan, Post- Pendri, Civil And Rev. District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh , Chhattisgarh.

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

For the Applicant : Shri Mayank Chandrakar, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Saurabh Dangi, Advocate -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta

¶12

Order On Board

¶13

17/08/2020

¶14

Heard on I.A. No.5 application for withdrawal of Company Petition.

¶15

As per I.A. No.5 during the pendency of the petition both the parties had settled their account and came up with an amicable settlement which persuaded the petitioner to withdraw the present petition. He does not want to pursue the petition and seeks liberty of this Court to withdraw the same.

¶16

Counsel for respondent submitted that he has no objection.

¶17

As per the provision of Rule 100 (1) of Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 (for short 'the Rules') a petition for winding-up shall not be withdrawn after presentation without the leave of the Court.

¶18

As per the provision of Rule 100 (2) of the Rules if the petition for winding-up has been advertised in accordance with the provision of Rule 99, an application for leave to withdraw the petition shall not be heard at any time before the date fixed in the advertisement for hearing of the petition.

¶19

In the case in hand the petition for winding-up was advertised in accordance with the provision of Rule 99 and date was fixed for hearing on 29^th June 2016. That date has been passed.

¶20

¶21

Looking to the provision of Rule 100 (1) and (2) of the Rules, I.A. No.5 is allowed and petitioner is permitted to withdraw the petition.

¶22

The said petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶23

Sd/- (Sharad Kumar Gupta) Judge

¶24

Kamde

M/s Parity Consumer Care Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s Minwool Rock Fibres Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Parity Consumer Care Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s Minwool Rock Fibres Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Umar Imam Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Yogesh Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Raju Kujur Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Hariprasad Tiwari Vs Patwari P.H.N. 18

Arun Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sudesh Jain Vs Nutan Kumar Sahu