Disposed
M/S Chaudhary Credits & Societies v. M/S Anka India Ltd.
Punjab & Haryana HCCP/101/2001
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARHHIGH COURT…
What the court decided
AI extract
PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARHHIGH COURT…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
�����������������������������������������������
CP No.101 of 2001 (O&M) Date of Decision: 30.05.2013
CIDEAS Investment (India) P.Ltd.
. . . . Petitioner
VS.
Anka India Ltd.
����������������������������������������
Present: Mr. Sanjeev Ghai, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. Rishav Singla, Advocate for
Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocate for the respondent
���������������������
(1). This petition filed under Sections 433, 434 & 439 of the Companies Act, 1956 (in short, ‘the Act’) read with Rule 9 of the Companies (Court) Rule, 1959 seeks winding up of the respondent-company, namely, M/s Anka India Ltd.
(2). While issuing show cause notice vide order dated July 5, 2001, the respondent was directed not to alienate its assets and property. Subsequently, the case was adjourned sine die vide order dated 11.10.2001 observing as follows :-
“It is stated at the Bar by the learned counsel for the respondent that a reference has been registered in the BIFR. In this view of the matter, this company petition is consigned to the record-room sine die with option to both the parties to file an application for revival of proceedings as and when the reference is finally disposed of by the BIFR. Directions are also given to the respondent that on conclusion of final proceedings, they
������
�����������������
shall inform the petitioner about the fate of the proceedings before the BIFR.”
(3). The petitioner has now vide a separate application (CA-151-2012) sought revival of the main petition on the plea that the respondent-Company has since been revived and the scheme of its rehabilitation has been sanctioned by the BIFR vide order/proceedings dated 05.05.2009.
(4). This Court passed the following order on January 11, 2013 while issuing notice in the aforesaid application on March 14, 2012:-
“…It is stated that the matter has been amicably
settled in terms of the Memorandum of Understanding, a photo copy whereof has been placed on record.
It is further stated that the first instalment of Rs.4 lacs has been paid and the second instalment is payable by 11.02.2013 followed by the last instalment on 11.05.2013.”
(5). Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that in terms of the Memorandum of Understanding (already on record), the respondent has paid a sum of Rs.20 lacs in five instalments rendering this petition as infructuous.
(6). In view of the above, this petition is disposed of in terms of the Memorandum of Understanding entered into between the parties.
�������� ��
!"#$%&�#$'()%*
���+�*�,�%����%�(�-��
�
2 provisions across 2 enactments
CIDEAS Investment (India) P.Ltd.
Anka India Ltd.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court