Allowed

M/s. Turbo Bharath Ltd., v. M/s. Balaji Agencies

Telangana HC25 Aug 2014COMPA/1106/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this company application, the court allowed the applicant's claim for recovery of Rs. 6,952/- along with interest as a sundry debtor. The respondent failed to appear after notice was served, leading to an ex parte order directing payment from the respondent's assets.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pay applicant Rs.6,952/- plus interest at 12% per annum from 26.11.2007, and costs of application.

M/s. Turbo Bharath Ltd., Vs M/s. Balaji Agencies — Company and Corporate | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY

¶2

COMPANY APPLICATION No.1106 of 2012 IN C.P.No.151 of 2009

¶3

Dated: 25.08.2014

¶4

Between: M/s. Turbo Bharath Ltd. Rep. by its Official Liquidator, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad.

¶5

.. Applicant

¶6

and M/s. Balaji Agencies, Opp. T.V. Tower Road, Ramanthapur Market, Ramanthapur, Hyderabad..

¶7

.. Respondent

¶8

Counsel for the applicant: Mr. M. Anil Kumar

¶9

Counsel for the respondent: --

¶10

The Court made the following: ORDER:

¶11

This application is filed under Section 446(2)(b) of the Companies Act, 1956, read with Rules 9 and 11(b) of the Companies (Court)

¶12

Rules, 1959, for a direction to the respondent to pay the applicant a sum of Rs.6,952/- along with interest at the rate of 24% per annum with effect from 26.11.2007 till the date of realization.

¶13

The Assistant Official Liquidator in his affidavit stated that by order dated 30.08.2010 in C.P.No.151 of 2009, this Court has directed winding up of the applicant company and appointed the Official Liquidator attached to this Court as the Liquidator of the said company. That as per the information available on its record, the company in liquidation was engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing hosiery innerwear garments throughout India and that as per the information made available by the Ex-Managing Director of the company in liquidation, the company supplied garment material to the respondent, which is a sundry debtor of the company, on a running account basis. The Assistant Official Liquidator further stated that as per the latest list of sundry debtors submitted by the Ex-Managing Director along with the statement of affairs and ledger accounts for the period from 01.04.2007 to 31.10.2008, the last transaction was made on 26.11.2007 and that the respondent owes to the company in liquidation a sum of Rs.6,952/-.

¶14

He has further stated that based on the above material, notice dated 12.04.2012 was issued by the office of the Official Liquidator to the respondent and that the same was returned with postal remarks “no

¶15

such office in my beat”.

¶16

This Court has directed the Official Liquidator to take out notice to the respondent. The Assistant Official Liquidator filed a report, on the service of notice on the respondent, along with a copy of acknowledgment evidencing receipt of notice. Despite service of notice, the respondent has not entered appearance and hence it is set ex parte.

¶17

Mr. M. Varaprasad Rao, the Assistant Official Liquidator, has filed his affidavit in lieu of chief-examination along with documents marked as Exs.A1 to A9. Ex.A1 is the certified true copy of extract from the list of sundry debtors contained in the statement of affairs submitted by the

¶18

Ex-Managing Director of the company in liquidation. Ex.A2 is the certified true copy of ledger account of the debtor for the period from 01.04.2007 to 31.10.2008. Ex.A3 is the certified true copy of relevant extract of cash receipt book, vide page Nos.166 and 167, dated 13.06.2007, of the respondent. Ex.A4 is the original journal voucher for sales returns along with credit note dated 20.07.2007 of the respondent. Ex.A5 is the original journal voucher for SHPL dated 03.11.2007 in respect of the respondent. Ex.A6 is the original journal voucher for SHPL dated 26.11.2007 in respect of the respondent. Ex.A7 is the office copy of notice dated 12.04.2012 issued to the respondent. Ex.A8 is the returned postal cover. Ex.A9 is the original authorization letter dated 06.08.2014 issued by the Deputy Official Liquidator in favour of the witness.

¶19

From the above pleadings and the material on record, which remained uncontroverted, this Court has no hesitation to hold that the respondent, which is a sundry debtor, is liable to pay a sum of Rs.6,952/- to the company in liquidation and that it has failed to pay the

¶20

same.

¶21

In view of the same, the application is allowed with a direction to the respondent to pay the applicant a sum of Rs.6,952/- along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum with effect from 26.11.2007 till the date of realization. It is further directed that the costs of this application do come out of the assets of the company in liquidation.

¶22

________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J

¶23

25^th August, 2014 IBL

M/s. Turbo Bharath Ltd., v. M/s. Balaji Agencies

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Turbo Bharath Ltd., v. M/s. Balaji Agencies

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bumi Reddy Pranitha Vs Citu, Union Office

Smt. Bumi Reddy Pranitha, Vs Dr.K.v.S.N.Prasad

M/s Prem Movies Vs Ushakiron Movies Ltd.

Sri Rajendra Kotwal Vs M/s Monarch Finlease Ltd., (in Liquidation)

M/s R.N.Marwah and Company, Vs M/S. R.N. Marwah and Company

Agila Specialties Private Limited, Vs -