Dismissed

Havells India Limited v. M S Marketing Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.

Karnataka HC4 Mar 2021COP/43/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses a Company Petition filed for winding up of the respondent company. The High Court of Karnataka held that the petition must be dismissed under Section 433(e) and (f) read with Section 434 due to non-compliance with a prior direction and persistent absence of the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

The Company Petition for winding up is dismissed for non-compliance with the direction dated 06.09.2019 and non-prosecution.

Havells India Limited Vs M S Marketing Enterprises… — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV

¶6

COMPANY PETITION NO.43/2008

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Havells India Limited Being a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered Office at No.1/7, Ram Kishore Road, Civil Lines, Delhi – 110054. Being the successor in interest to the Company Crabtree India Limited, Represented by its Vice President and Authorized Signatory Mr.Pramod Mishra, S/o.Shri.M.N.Mishra, Aged 61 years.

¶9

… Petitioner

¶10

(By Sri.G.L.Viswanath, Advocate)

¶11

AND:

¶12

M.S.Marketing Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., No.1, Ground Floor, NBS Towers, No.7, Mandi Veerappa Lane, SJP Road Cross, Bangalore.

¶13

...Respondent

¶14

(By Sri. Kamath.K.J, Advocate)

¶15

This Company Petition is filed under Section 433 (e) and (f) read with Section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, praying to direct that the respondent company M/s. M.S.Marketing Enterprises Private Limited be ordered to be

¶16

¶17

wound up under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 and etc.,

¶18

This Company Petition coming on for Final Hearing , this day, the Court made the following:

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This Court by order dated 06.09.2019 had directed the petitioner to furnish fresh certificate of incorporation.

¶21

It is also noted on 06.09.2019 that there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. On 07.01.2021, once again there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner and it was made clear that, if there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner, the matter would be proceeded with by passing necessary orders.

¶22

When the matter is called out once again, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.

¶23

¶24

In light of absence of diligence in

¶25

prosecuting the present proceedings, the petition is dismissed for non-compliance while noting noncompliance with the direction of this Court on 06.09.2019.

¶26

In light of the dismissal of the petition, no orders

¶27

are called for as regards CA No.85/2018.

¶28

Sd/JUDGE

¶29

Havells India Limited v. M S Marketing Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Havells India Limited v. M S Marketing Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.

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

Mysore Palace Board Vs the Income Tax Officer(Tds), Ward 1

M/S Asian Fab Tec Ltd. Vs Asst Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

Smt. Vinita Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax

M/S Cosmos Watch Industries Ltd. Vs Nil

M/S Karnataka Financial Services Ltd. Vs Nil

M/S Vijaya Commercial Credit Ltd. Vs Nil