High Court Karnataka High Court

M/S Star Spin And Twist … vs Sri Suresh Manharlal Mehta … on 6 August, 2009

Karnataka High Court
M/S Star Spin And Twist … vs Sri Suresh Manharlal Mehta … on 6 August, 2009
Author: Anand Byrareddy


IN THE HIGH Cr:>I;3RT OF KARNATAE{A AT BANQALGRE

DATED THIS THE 6″ DAY 0:»? AUGU$§T”2A(§{i§fJ: f

BEFORE:

THE HOWBLE MR, msT:c£iA;mgs;%§Ia%’B%£mR§:k:>§*:*7

CC}M1F’ANY APPL’I_§g§.’fI(§}~é._ N;),96s,!2a¢a
C()MPANY .¢;PPLIC;éQf’I£3N N0,_14=§4.s”2G€)fi
C()MPAI~I’f AP_P’LICATI€__}I\E_ N§.2.80€§;’3{}{}? Aim
COMPANY’__APPLiC4§{f*E£}3?~I$42.301.5209?
CQMPANY EB? :T1(}N = 14;». 1. 998

COMPAE€v’z*:§;§§§;E{j;Aj;:{}1§E é~:;;.9::;3é{s2§0fi
BETWEEEF %

Etsifs. fiiai” ‘f§?pi1: Taifizisi vfiiiaéhinarizs Lid”
{En iiqgfz} rept*e$e;z{a££ h’jé*.1;hé Ciffiaiai
Liqa§.§daiuI’, aitai-gfiazd Em High Cuuri inf

% % . Kamataizza, :3? FI0:*;ӣ}& F Wing,
2 » I§it:§:§ix*§.;;a«.f$a;iQn,_
A KQran1.:mgaia,”T- ,

;3a::g’aIm*::— ” V ,_, APFLECAEJT

(“B_\;.»44”.’.3a’§1zv$.,.T_):£*,4′.;.*§.<:1i< am} Sri.V.Js::yz:ra1n, Aeivuisaiss}

" 1 .Sa:t:s¥: Mzmharlai Mable: {fihairmaiz}

% Eaita fiasad, Flat 190.12, I floor,
Gmnacilal Cress Lane?

fippssite Navarsji Gamadlai Raéad,
Samba}:-«26.

2:: Sri;S§Dcxrara}g

§

– 2
£90, B.R:»,u;c Coarse Read,
Coimbatore,

Tamil Nadu.

3. Sri.R0hit Manharial Mehta,

Panoranua 7% F $001;

Vvfiiisieshwai’,
Bsmbay~4(}C’ G06.

4. Sri.Yuii S8133: (Executive Dirccfbrj

6,-“C, Suresh Colony,
S.V-Ruad,

Vile Park: (West),
Bombay-400 O56.

S:’i.Tapenu Siiraigsh i’~}¥-::§1i;i’v{.E}i1fe”(:{0t’T§;
1vifs;S%::1r-.S}:>in Twist—Mach’i§efics Limited,
Dh;~,mra_§ E\rfaha_L.__ % — I
Chafiégapafti ‘Shi’vg;’i4 JMa§ara§k%Marg,

Bum§3a}€-4{}{3 339:” .. é RESPQNDENTS

gm

(B};._{ ‘ 1’x!I;a*7s:.Carié:;p.V;;$é:r.V’ agxd C<.1mpar2y for R1, R3 £0 RS?

V' ., M;'-s.M.T?JV,Nehru aniiflssociates far R2,
V_ . M:.G.Rv.?x»'§;3_h_3'2z. fur R3 and
§;i§.U'da§«»..Shafika:? am} Associates fer R23. fifiémcates}

$$$2Q!?3t

,.T1hi..s.v(;Jumpany Appliuafiun is fiicd under Scciisan 2354(5)

A {EA} 0:3-féze Cemgsazzies Act, 1956 read with R333 132 cf the
Qumpaaiss (Céaurfif) 12:13:25, 1959, praying E0 flake: wgngésance uf 133%:
_ '~rf;i:'i%:;::ce cenzmitieé by the accused herein net wxnplying with the

r:}:qu§remen£s :3? pmvisions of Sc{;.«454 Bf ihz: Campanics Acg

'"£§56 and '59 my them fur the Said ofisncc in accardmcc wslzh the

pfixzedurc {aid (fawn in the zzotit: wfcriminai prmzeéems and punish
them acccrdizxgiy,

5

COMPANY APPLICATEON No. 1454 01:’ 2% I A aljj _ %

BETWEEN :

1 Mr Smash Manhsrial IE/fzrzfiia?


Son of late Manherlal Mehta,"A»

Aged Abuui 75 Ygears, V. «' '

Residing as Dana _ V »  

Fiat N0. 'E 2, Gatnadia    _

Off: Navmjcc:    

Mumbai +409 022:5. J % ;.. APPLICANT

(By 53. %cz.rs:;;:pa%;5; :6f.’L1:¥f::»§§:*a.r2_3r,«§.€’-¥L£§*irV:#3ealt:s}

I .. MES Star S}L’§I1___§§J}d Twisi Machinefias
A ” ‘ i;i1:1ifed'{In Liquidation),
V’ ” G«fl3’cial Liquidaiur,
‘H.i°g¥”; “C:§i2rt cf Kamalaivza,
Q 415 I*-Eu?” I} & F Wing,
Kandréya Sadan,
.Kmf’a2nangala,
Bazégaiore _ 560034, RESPCINDENT

f:§hfi.Deepak and S}1ri.V.1a_;garam, Adwcaicsj

~ ‘ Applicaiiun flied under Rah: 9 ef the Ccxmpanissaz (Cami)
* 3.3368 1959, Rfw. Section of 4§4(3) sf {he Companies Act, 1956,
praying that ii}: the reasum: stated iharcin this Camrl may pieastzd

3

4
{cs cundune. the (161351, if any, in {Ring ihc slaiemtsnl of aflfziirs
before the Ofiicial Liquidator.

CGMPANY APPLICATION No. 880 (X2007

BETWEEN:

E Mr. Suresh Manherlal Mt.~:}xia,Vg
SE0 Late Manherlal Mehta, V
Aged about 75 Yeam, ‘V ‘ .._V
Residing at Datta Pmsad,V V
Fiat No.12, ‘

C-?£13iI13i’»=i.€i”‘3?”§??3S1″‘midV.¥V’V ” Q

:{V_)£:{V.;}”4£7EiA!!;$V”(f);it:tf;VVVVVCV}£i¥_l}V&ii1iVi§£. Rc:s_aV<§V,V
VEvium?3ai%:3f;}..{;*2!5.V.. % APPLICANT

{By Sri.(jéi;fi&ppaVVé':, C?f.;§i§V'V&ny, Advueaic}

V _ IVIXS Spin and Twisi fviac-himarics
%. I;§:i1i:ed.V"V('}ti Liquidatinn),
V Thé Eiffibial Liquidaior, V
High' $0311 af Karnataka,
VV-'-1.31 Fiver, D & F Wing,

V V' Kendriya Sadan,

Koramangala,
Bangaiore–56€1 034. RESPONBEFIT

V V V V {By Shrifictzpaic and Shri.V.}ayamtn, Advcrcaies)

This Appiicaiion filed under Rule: 9 of Cumganias {Cami}
Rules 1959? Wu', Sections 63 and 65 of the evidence Act, 1872,

'Q

praying ihai the rcasuns stated £11crcir2 this

to permit the ascused to lead the seccndargf'-gvidenécii T' with

phutucepins of wriain documtznis
equity. T T A L
COMPANY APPLICATXGTJ}'EifT8{}1\Qii29Q7 _ % '
BETWEEN: A %
I Mr. Surcsh j' _
Son Of Late Manhcr1aI'}Aclft::, "
Aged Abuu.i75 V95:-..*–'s,_ ' _ ' 7
Residing ataD1attalI_'ra§a_£§; _
Flat NQ12, gfiagnaciiu 'vifrusg. Kauai V

Off 1'5Eavr_é:j::ré '
" A?}7'I.¥CAN'¥'

(By Sr§';C2ix7iapp–aLéZa Ac} vucaicj

AND: .%

" V. .Mf'S Sm; Spinfifié Twist Iviachizzcrics

" — "(En Liquidation},
T1.{<":–. ()f'fi'x:.ia'i§ ¥ Jquidator;
' . Higi'i7§:-ué1riufKaIna£aka¢
élti7:'I'7§r;1:)r, D and F Wing.
Kezxdriya Sadem,
Keramangala,

" Y Bangaim-563 @341 RESPQNDEM'

V. Shri.Dcepak and Sri.V.3ayamm, Adxrmtalcs)

This Appiicaiiun flied under Ruhr 9 9f Cumpanitss-3 {Court}
Rules 1959, Rfw. Sections 63 and 6:'? of tha evidence Act, l8?2,
praying ihai {fie rcasuns siaied ihcrcin ibis Court may be pieaseé

%

n…..lI,1;~: in$_éf£§Si– cfJ_vf L4

6
{L3 pcnnii the accused £0 Icad Eu: tztscundary es.-‘idc:zc¢:, with
photocopies of certain decumentg in the interest of jugtica and
equity.

Thea: Company Appiicaiiuns coming on _j_£i:i_’.~:
day, the Court made ‘she foliowing: – ‘ ‘A L’ % – ‘ ”

C-A 965.90%? is filcé undrzr fS(¢V5§} {3A.’v”

Cumpzmiess Ac-L 1956 read xviu{h. \Rex}e 13?: ‘A_V{}f{}1§:} Companies

{Court} ‘ ii?-EV 3
its’ the ca,$é”»§§f Liquidator that Eh: cumpuny in
liquidation 4 i.%rzi_$ ‘urhdezrit-d be weuztdmp by an urdcr dalad

“*i{3:’}§_i’9’§1’3″pgsscuvV”‘ifi Company Pctiéion No.Eiif39°98. The

xvas apgminicd as 33:: iiquidaimr mi” Ehc

ce:¥:pan.3é.’ -. The accused herein were required ii} sufiméi that

, ?~i;:£_;:méfii L}? Alfaérs 0f the cuznpazzy in fiquidaiiggn in the

gamsibea rem duiy verified witifin 2: (iays Bum aha am 01*

V’ nuvinding-up urdesr. Thai the Siaicmeni oi’AITairs shcmici hats: been

filsd on £3!” bcfim: 1{}.3.i9″§)9 and nuiicz: was irssuad on 14.12.1999

‘T

I
to accused I in 5 to flit: Statement of Affairs and since £hey had

failed [:3 do 50, ii is urged that {hay have commiEia¢d_:”mi:E:ncc3

punishable under Sub-seciiunts (5) and (SA) of

hemx: gamycd it: take: cugnizanuc of §.§:a:;:”a;:.(Tcnt%c to’ ~ ‘

punish {he accustfii ;:ctx3rdingly.
‘§”§2=.: evidance having béc1vi71cnderesi in as? lhé
appiiczaiion, the same m§:.’z~~.rcsi:;1§:d_ ‘b3.’:..1§1f§§’:fcsp0nci’é:riis to contend

ihai i*.§ 2iVV3{:iay in fiiing the Siaiemcni oi’

:’«’xfl}1irs. “Ho*e~cvc1; ii:.:haS’bgéén =dor::: and the rcgpundcnis have aim)

flied; appiicziiiczfgs’ reasons for the dciay ami seeking

. :91′ in CA 1454/2086 which is pending

“” 1;-oi’;I’:s§gic’rz£iiL;n. ‘ V .

I*£iAsoi§if as the non-wzumpiiancc {hat is cumpiaincci of as

rtzgaggis {he fumishing of the par{iL’:,:§ar:s, axcspi {hat ihr: names eff

Lfigriain wurkmttn aouid zzcei. be furziishtsd since: 312 rcspundcnis

wan: nui in possessiun :3? 8:6 same and éhai there are nu gihsr

pariicuiars which are {bung} wafiiing as 31:: r*:3pc.>nd.r have:

6

indeed fumi:-zhed partxgc-ulars suughi for and wh iChV

possession vi’ the rzsspomienis. Tht::t§”‘is”n0 é..isp;zi¢é”m; asptscfi L

that the respundcnls had beiaicdiy
and have furnished ulhcr par£ic§”1i§§C:*;~; whic?t._Vg~?er%§-I réiggziféd exccpi
lhai they deg rtoi gwssessf LE1; ._c§-V2’i:1.in zvofkfiicn which this

respundcsms are even {uda§(_fio_L iaia :;:x.>:§i’£i;1I3~V..’LQ’ihmish.

Gixx*c:s'”i§i£:sf锣at._;-‘is a;;aivci=r_cL’ni’:;{ia33£:c¢s, {ha pmscni Company
A §ic;:iiun–i:i”€A §;’;’5:’2E)13i3 is d§S””‘i$;cd {:5 as not havin ¥ made cal
21 cast: for pI4nishm’e:.f2L’:V:§i7.[}i::..am:ust:d 23.11:} {km accused (night is be

discharged: ” =

” ., Q $’:’C'<);'np's21;y Afififiééfiun in CA §454f2Gi}é £5 aiimzwsai.

","mg@@gfifigcAmm£anmmcA3m&anum@nmg

nui ':;1:rvi__$a'e .512? uonsidcmiion and accordingiy sianci dispused of.

Sdfléy
Fudge

IIV