Disposed

M.R B.Vasu v. M/S Dhir International Private Limited

Delhi HC11 Jan 2019CO.PET./307/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the application for substitution of the petitioner with the applicant company following a business transfer. Withhold evidence regarding creditor lists by the respondent, the proceedings were disposed of, granting liberty to the new petitioner to file a claim with the appointed Official Liquidator.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; petitioner substituted with applicant company; liberty to file claim before Official Liquidator within six weeks.

M.R B.Vasu Vs M/S Dhir International Private… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Delhi HC (2019)

¶1

$~CP-9

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

CO.PET. 307/2014 M.R B.VASU ..... Petitioner Through Ms.Haripriya Padmanabhan and Ms.Gayatri Verma, Advs.

¶4

versus

¶5

M/S DHIR INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD. ..... Respondent Through None.

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH O R D E R

¶7

% 11.01.2019

¶8

CA No.1470/2018

¶9

This application is filed by the petitioner seeking substitution of the petitioner with the applicant.

¶10

It is pleaded that pursuant to the execution of a Business Transfer Agreement dated 28.03.2018, the respondent has become debtor in the books of the applicant company inasmuch as the applicant has taken over petitioner’s sole proprietorship business. Accordingly, the application is allowed. The applicant, i.e., M/s Annapoorani Textiles Pvt. Ltd. will now be the petitioner.

¶11

CO.PET. 307/2014

¶12

This court had heard the arguments on 16.08.2018 and had noted that the respondent had in a handwriting note confirmed the credit balance of Rs.86,55,110/- where the company seal and signatures of the authorised signatory have been affixed. This document had been denied by the respondent. Accordingly, a direction was passed to the respondent to place

¶13

on record its audited balance sheet ending for the financial years 31.03.2011 to 31.03.2013 showing the list of creditors.

¶14

Despite final opportunity given on 11.12.2018, needful has not been done.

¶15

Today, none has appeared for the respondent. I may note that in Co.Pet. No.505/2016, this court has already passed the order dated 08.10.2018 appointing the OL as the provisional liquidator of the respondent company. Hence, nothing needs to be done in the present petition. The present petition is accordingly disposed of. Liberty is given to the petitioner to file appropriate claim before the OL in the prescribed format within six weeks from today. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶16

JAYANT NATH, J.

¶17

JANUARY 11, 2019/v

M.R B.Vasu v. M/S Dhir International Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.R B.Vasu v. M/S Dhir International Private Limited

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

Merina Commotrade Private Limited Vs Shubhkamna Buildtech Privae Limited

Small Industries Development Bank of India Vs M/S Garushi Garments Pvt. Ltd.

S.E. Investments Limited Vs Galgotia Hotels and Resorts Private Limited

Shri Vishal Ohri Vs M/S Aryan Retreats and Ventures Private Limited

Jaideep Sangwan Vs Mr. Yatharth Vashisht & Ors.

Shyam Metalics & Energy Limited Vs Action Ispat & Power Private Limited