A Company Petition was dismissed as it had become infructuous. The Court found that a compromise had been approved by a Division Bench, assets were handed over, and no further proceedings survived. A delay in listing was not pursued further.
Malice was dismissed as becoming infructuous.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Company Petition No. 30/1998
M/s S N Goenka And Co Pvt Ltd
----Petitioner
Versus
M/s Pooja Casting Pvt Ltd
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. U.S. Patole, O.L. For Respondent(s) : None present
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
Judgment / Order
07/01/2020
(2 of 3)
[COP-30/1998]
“On 9.10.2003, the counsel for the official liquidator raised an objection that once the winding up proceedings are started, they cannot be stopped unless the scheme to this effect is submitted before the Court. Counsel for the appellant today filed an affidavit supporting the contents made in the application that there is no single creditor on record, therefore, the scheme need not be formulated U/s. 391 of the Companies Act.
Mr. Garg, counsel for the Official Liquidator has no objection in case the prayer sought for by the appellant is allowed. He submits that winding up proceedings can be closed, when on affidavit it has been stated that company has no creditor on record.
Considering the submissions, the winding up proceedings is closed.
Mr. Garg, counsel for the official liquidator also submits that now possession has been taken over by the Official Liquidator, that possession of the assets of the company should be handed over to the appellant.
Appellant has no objection in taking over the possession of the assets of the company.
Considering the no objection of the appellant, the assets of the company should be handed over to the appellant within a month.
The order dated 23.8.2002 passed by the learned Single Judge is quashed and set-aside.
In the result, the appeal is allowed with the above directions.”
(3 of 3)
[COP-30/1998]
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J
SUNIL SOLANKI /19/12
M/s S N Goenka And Co Pvt Ltd
M/s Pooja Casting Pvt Ltd
Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
