Allowed

M/s. Teleteck India Limited(in liqn) v. No Respondent

Telangana HC22 Sept 2025COMPA/260/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Company application by the Official Liquidator seeking approval of half-yearly accounts and payment of audit fees. The Court took the accounts on record and permitted payment of audit fees from the company's funds or Estate and Establishment Fund.

What did the court decide?

Half-yearly accounts taken on record; permission granted to pay audit fees from company funds or Estate and Establishment Fund.

M/s. Teleteck India Limited(in liqn) Vs No… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

t^3168I

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD}

¶3

TVIONDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND^{DAY OF SEPTEIMBER} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^K.LAKSHMAN

¶6

COMPANY APPL ICATION NO:^{260 OF 2025}

¶7

¶8

R.C.C.No. 5 of^'1999

¶9

ln the matter of the Companies^{Act, 1956} And

¶10

ln the matter of M/s Teleteck^{lndia Limited(in liqn),}

¶11

The official Liquidator, attached^{to the Hon'bleHighcourt of Telangana,andAndhra} Pradesh, 1stfl6or, Corporate^{Bhawan, Bandlaguda,Nagole Hyderabad -500068}

¶12

...APPLICANT

¶13

ApplicationUnderSection462ofCompaniesAct,lg56readwithRule29S and Rule 306 of the companies^{(court)Rules '1959 prayingthat this Hon'blecourt} may be^pleased to^:

¶14

take the half-yearly accounts^{of the sublect company (in liquidation)for the} period from 01 .04.2023 to 30.09.2023, along^{with lndependent Auditors'} ileport dated 31 .05.2025^{submitted on 09.06.2025 by M/s. KBSand} Associates, Chartered^{Accountantson record and permission maybe} accorded to make the^{payment of auditfee of Rs.500/-plus GST to the said} auditor.

¶15

ii. cost of this application^{(Courtfee Stampsand Notary Chargesetc ,) maybe} permitted to be met out by the official^{Liquidatorfrom the available funds of} ih" corpany⁽ⁱⁿ liquidation)^{or Estateand Establishment Fund account if no} fund is avaiiable in the^{company's account subject to reimbursement of the} same from the funds^{of company (in liqn) upon realizationof assets of the} Company⁽ⁱⁿ liqn),^{if anY.}

¶16

This application coming on^{for orders,upon reading the Judge'ssummons} and the affidavit dated^{28.07.2025filed by sri uttamKumar Sahoo,official} Liquidator attached to the^{High court for the stateof Telangana, in support of the} company Application and upon^{hearing the argumentsof Sri J.SreenathReddy,} Advocate for the Official Liquidator/Applicant

¶17

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶18

THE HONOTIRABLE SRI^{JUSTICE K' LAKSIN'IAN} COMPANY APPLICA TION^{No. 260 of 2(l} rl.

¶19

tn R-C.C.N o.5 ol¹⁹⁹⁹

¶20

ORDER:

¶21

Heard Sri J.Sreenath^{Reddy, Iearned counsel fir} the Official Liquidator.

¶22

Having satisfied with the^{reasons mentioned in t} e supporting aflidavit, and^{upon consideringthe half-yearly accollrt} filed by the Iearned Official Liquidator,^{this applicationis ord:} ed rvith the follorving:-

¶23

a, The halfl-yearly accounts^{of the subject Comparl} ,^{which is in} ).2023, along

¶24

liquidation lor the^{period from 01.04.2023to 30 l} with the Auditor's Report^{dated31-05.2025} rubmitted on 09.06.2025 by M/s.KBS^{& Associates,Charterel} Accountants, are taken on record.

¶25

b. Pernission is accorded^{to the leamedOfficialLi1} ridator to pay an audit fee of Rs.500/-^{plus GST to the Auditor}

¶26

c. Permission is also accorded^{to the learnedOfllc} al Liquidator to make the said^{paymentfrom the availablt:} lunds of the Company⁽ⁱⁿ tiquidation),^{or from the Estateanc} lstablishment Fund account if no fund^{is available in the Comlr} .ny's account, sub-iect to^{re imbursement from the fundso1} 3ompany (in

¶27

liquidation) upon realization^{of its assets-}

¶28

SD/. t\I VIJAYA BHASKER IOINT REGISTRAR ;ecrro€orrrcen q -IV.V LL'tl u

¶29

To,

¶30

The Official Liquidator, M/s Teleteck^{lndia Limited (in liqr} )^{Office at 1st floor,} Corporate Bhawan, Bandlaguda,^{Nagole, Hyderabad.}

¶31

The Registrar of companies. -rvrinistry of corporate Affairs, Government of lndra, Government of lndia, 2nd Flooi. Corpoiate Bhawan. Naoole. Rllgksllf^{r_lattiannaramavilase,- Hafathnrs;r- N/;;;;1, ;1"-;L R"ooy} ursrflcr, tetangana State pin Code_5000680Code_5000680

¶32

ursrflcr, tetangana State pin Code_5000680Code_5000680

¶33

3 l,l"-IggiolllD[Ttoj. South Eastern Region, Ir/inistry of Corporate Affairs, r^- r-roor. uorporate tshawan, Nagole. Bandlaguda. Thattiannaram Villaoe. H^ayathnagar Mandar. Ranga Red-dy orstrict, fet-ngrri'b]ri" brr'c,ji?iiooo 680

¶34

Ihe section officer, o.s.section, High court of Hyderabad for the state of Telangana

¶35

one cc to sri J.sreenath Reddy. Advocate for officiar Liquidator, High court

¶36

^{for the State of Telangana(OpUC.;}

¶37

Two CD Copies

TPK /PSLry

HIGH COURT

DATED:2210912025

ORDER

... itiI r;, -
()
1,: ,:...
a\
I. il
O4 TTC M
i)t
\ \ .)/
Ir,,,r 'cir.1

¶43

COMPA.No.260^{of 2025} IN R.G.C.NO.S of¹⁹⁹⁹

¶44

ORDERING^{THE COMPANY APPLICITTION}

¶45

r
r (, ^
_=I' ' 'l i

M/s. Teleteck India Limited(in liqn) v. No Respondent

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Teleteck India Limited(in liqn) v. No Respondent

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

Bhukya Shankar Naik Vs State of Telengana

Pavan Kumar Ismal @ Ins Pavan Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

Gurrala Srinivas Reddy Vs The State of Telanagana

M/s.Taurus Earthmovers Limited (in liqn) Vs Nil

M/s. Vaishu Engineering Industries Limited(in liqn) Limited Vs Nil

In the matter of M/s.Arrow Metalspin Limited (in liqn) Vs No Respondent