Disposed

Asset Reconstruction Company (India)Ltd., v. M/s Smithand Kenner Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd.

Telangana HC10 Apr 2014CP/150/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court closed the winding up petition for nonpayment of debt after the respondent deposited significant sums and undertook to pay the remaining balance in installments, granting the petitioner liberty to pursue pending securitization proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Company Petition closed with liberty to pursue pending securitization proceedings; liberty given to seek revival if undertaking to pay balance is not met.

Asset Reconstruction Company (India)Ltd., Vs M/s… — Company and Corporate | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

The Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy

¶2

Company Petition No.150 of 2011

¶3

Dated 10.04.2014

¶4

Between: Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd., Bangalore, rep. by its Asst. Vice President Sri T.Suri Babu

¶5

…Petitioner

¶6

And

¶7

M/s.Smith and Kenner Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd., Hyderabad, rep. by its Managing Director

¶8

…Respondent

¶9

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.M.Srikanth Reddy

¶10

Counsel for the respondent: Mr.Andapalli sanjeev Kumar

¶11

for Sri S.Sriram

¶12

The Court made the following:

¶13

Order:

¶14

This Company Petition is filed for ordering

¶15

winding up of the respondent- Company for nonpayment of the debt due to the petitioner.

¶16

Mr.S.Jayaswamy, Chairman and Managing Director of the respondent, has filed an affidavit whereunder he has stated that this Court by Order, dated 05-02-2014, directed the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.1 Crore towards outstanding dues to the petitioner; that in pursuance thereof, the respondent deposited Rs.20 lakhs on 19-02-2014 and another sum of Rs.20 lakhs on

¶17

13-03-2014 through Demand Drafts bearing Nos.26658112 and 014969 respectively drawn on ICICI Bank, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad; and that due to unexpected expenditure, the respondent was unable to pay the remaining balance of Rs.60 lakhs. While apologizing for nonpayment of the said amount, the deponent has undertaken that he will pay the balance sum of Rs.60 lakhs in two installments on 31-05-2014 and 30-06-2014.

¶18

At the hearing, it has come out that with the proposed payment of Rs.60 lakhs, the total amount paid by the respondent would come to Rs.3.22 Crores as against the principal sum of Rs.1.25 Crores, which was received by the respondent in the year 2003. It has also come out that the proceedings under the

¶19

Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, have been initiated; that the respondent has succeeded in its appeal filed before the Debt Recovery Tribunal; and that the appeal filed by the petitioner is pending.

¶20

In my opinion, as the petitioner has paid the entire principal amount and a part of interest, besides undertaking to pay a further sum of Rs.60 lakhs towards interest, I deem it appropriate that the Company Petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to pursue the pending securitization proceedings. Liberty is also given to the petitioner to seek revival of this Company Petition, if the respondent fails to pay the sum of Rs.60 lakhs as undertaken in the abovementioned affidavit apart from initiating Contempt Proceedings.

¶21

As a sequel, Company Application Nos.935 and 936 of 2011 and 507 of 2014 are disposed of.

¶22

_______________________ (C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 10^th April, 2014 LUR

Asset Reconstruction Company (India)Ltd., v. M/s Smithand Kenner Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asset Reconstruction Company (India)Ltd., v. M/s Smithand Kenner Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd.

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

The Administrator of the Specified Undertaking of the Vs M/s Allwyn Watches Limited (in Liquidation)

G. Gurootham Vs Sirsilk Limited. (in liquidation)

Safeeya Begum Vs Sirsilk Limited. (in liquidation)

Smt. Thota Pushpalatha Vs Sri. G.Vijaya Kumar

Tripplar School of learning Vs Mannava Bapaiah

Tripplar School of Learning Vs Mannava Bapaiah