This order dismisses a winding up petition against a respondent company as withdrawn, and simultaneously allows the petitioner's application to withdraw the petition, dismissing a consequential company application.
Company petition dismissed as withdrawn; Company Application No.247 of 2013 allowed.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
COMPANY PETITION No.209 of 2012 &
COMPANY APPLICATION NO.247 of 2013
Date: 12.02.2013
Between:
M/s.ICICI Bank Limited, Financial District Branch, Hyderabad, rep. by Ananth Bhatt.
… Petitioner
And: M/s.Cyber Mate Infotek Limited, Karkhana, Secunderabad Rep. by its Director.
… Respondent
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
COMPANY PETITION No.209 of 2012 &
COMPANY APPLICATION NO.247 of 2013
COMMON ORDER :
This company petition was filed under Sections 433(e) & (f) read with 434(1)(a) and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956, to wind up the respondent company. While so, Company Application No.247 of 2013 was filed by the petitioner Bank under Rule 100 of Companies (Court)
Rules, 1959, to permit it to withdraw the company petition, as there are no further claims surviving against the respondent company.
Accepting the reasons set out in the affidavit filed in support of the Company Application, the Company Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Company Application No.247 of 2013 is allowed. Company Application No.1098 of 2012 shall stand dismissed in consequence.
________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J
Date : 12.02.2013. ssp/bss
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to permit withdrawal of company winding up petition under Rule 100 of Companies (Court) Rules, 1959.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M/s.ICICI Bank Limited
M/s.Cyber Mate Infotek Limited
Sanjay Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
