Allowed

Hry. Financial Corporation, Chd. v. M/S R.P. Spintex Ltd, Sirsa & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC13 Dec 2012CAPP/10/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This company appeal, filed by HFC, challenges the Official Liquidator's order rejecting the appellant's claim against a borrowed company. The Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order and directing the Liquidator to re-determine the claim based on a conditional settlement resolution.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was allowed, the impugned order dated 02.03.2009 was set aside regarding the appellant, and the Official Liquidator was directed to re-determine the claim within three months.

Hry. Financial Corporation, Chd. Vs M/S R.P… — Company and Corporate | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

�� 

¶2

¶3

CAPP-10-2009 (O&M)

¶4

Date of Decision: 13.12.2012

¶5

¶6

HFC

¶7

. . . . Appellant Vs.

¶8

M/s. RP Spintex Ltd., Sirsa & Anr. . . . . Respondents

��

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶13

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶14

¶15

Present: Mr. Kamal Sehgal, Advocate for the appellant

¶16

Ms. Divya Sharma, Advocate with Dy.OL

¶17

¶18

��

¶19

(1). This Company Appeal is at the instance of Haryana Financial Corporation Ltd. (HFC) and impugns the decision dated 02.03.2009 of the Official Liquidator rejecting its claim purportedly on the basis of One Time Settlement directly made by the appellantCorporation with the management of the Company-in-liquidation i.e. M/s. RP Spintex Ltd., Sirsa.

¶20

(2). Learned counsel for the appellant-Corporation has referred to a decision taken by the Board of Directors of the AppellantCorporation on 11.01.2007 (Annexure A11) whereunder the proposal for settlement of loan account of M/s. RP Spintex Ltd. under the policy for Compromise Settlement of Loan Accounts of HFC, 2005 was accepted “subject to compliance of terms & conditions as contained in the agenda note”. The resolution further reveals that the Board had

¶21

��

¶22

��

¶23

decided that “the claim to be received by the Corporation will be over and above the settlement amount as worked out under the Loss Policy 2005.

¶24

(3). The above-stated decision taken by the Board of Directors of the appellant-Corporation cannot be said to be a full and final settlement directly arrived at with the management of the Companyin-liquidation. It was a conditional settlement. This aspect, however, has been overlooked by the Official Liquidator while determining the appellant’s claim vide order under appeal dated 02.03.2009.

¶25

(4). Consequently and for the reasons mentioned afore-stated, the appeal is allowed; the Minutes of Meeting as well as the consequential decision taken on 02.03.2009 so far as it pertains to the appellant-Corporation, is/are set aside with a direction to the Official Liquidator to re-determine the appellant’s claim in accordance with the law.

¶26

(5). The needful shall be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

(6). Dasti .

�� 

!"#$%&�#$'()%*

�� +,-.

Hry. Financial Corporation, Chd. v. M/S R.P. Spintex Ltd, Sirsa & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hry. Financial Corporation, Chd. v. M/S R.P. Spintex Ltd, Sirsa & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Case details

Similar cases

Chandan Dabra and Anr. Vs Dabra Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. Muktsar

M/S Gir Movers Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Nijjer Agro Foods Ltd.

M/S Faridabad Autocomp Systems (P) Ltd. Vs M/S Skh Metals Ltd.

M/S Bilag Industries Private Limited Vs M/S Modern Insecticides Limited

Hanney @ Honey Vs State of Punjab

Jagdish Vs State of Haryana