High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Richa Capital Private Limited vs Unknown on 5 February, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Richa Capital Private Limited vs Unknown on 5 February, 2009
C.A. No.92 of 2009 and                                            -1-
C.P. No.28 of 2009

           IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB
                AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

                                C.A. No.92 of 2009 and
                                C.P. No.28 of 2009
                                Date of Decision:05.02.2009

IN THE MATTER OF

Richa Clothing Private Limited, Plot No.5, Sector-7, IMT Industrial Area,
Manesar, Gurgaon, Haryana.

                                AND


Richa Capital Private Limited, 1483, Sector-14, Faridabad, Haryana


                                ....Petitioner/Transferor Company No.1 & 2


CSB Capital Limited, 1483, Sector-14, Faridabad, Haryana


                                ............ Petitioner/Transferee Company


Present:   Mr. Aashish Middha, Advocate
           for the petitioner.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

1.

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the
judgment ?

2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ?

-.-

K. KANNAN J. (ORAL)

1. The petition has been filed under Sections 391 (1) to 394 of the

Companies Act seeking for sanction of the Scheme of Amalgamation as

going concern. The first Transferor Company-Richa Clothing Private

Limited, was originally incorporated in Delhi on 07.06.2002 and later

shifted its office to the State of Haryana. The first Transferor Company has

been engaged in the business of importers and exporters, wholesale, retail

and are dealers of fashion accessories for men, women and children.

2. The second Transferor Company called Richa Capital Private
C.A. No.92 of 2009 and -2-
C.P. No.28 of 2009

Limited which had been originally incorporated in Delhi on 28.01.2005 later

shifted its office to the State of Haryana. The second Transferor Company

has been engaged in the business of financing by way of loaning, lending

and advancing money, leasing and hire purchase companies and merchant

banking.

3. The Transferee Company, which had been originally incorporated

in Delhi on 16.09.2001 in the name of CSB Infotech Ltd. and later on

changed its name as CSB Capital Limited and shifted its office in the State

of Haryana. The Transferee Company has been carrying on the business of

investment and underwriting etc.

4. The first Transferor Company is a closely held company and

there are only 5 equity shareholders and all of them have given consent for

the proposed scheme and the affidavit of shareholders in this regard has

been furnished. The second Transferor Company has 8 equity shareholders

and they have also given a similar consent. The Transferee Company has 10

equity shareholders and they have also given consent for the proposed

scheme. Both the Transferor Companies and Transferee Company have no

secured creditors and the unsecured creditors of the Transferor/Transferee

Companies are set out in separate lists and all the unsecured creditors have

given their consent for the proposed scheme and for dispensing with the

meetings for consideration of the subject.

5. The Auditor’s Report for the year ending 31.03.2008 is furnished.

Having regard to the fact that there is a limited body of shareholders which

has given consent for the Scheme and there is concurrence again regarding

dispensing with notices of meeting to consider the subject as also the fact

that the unsecured creditors have also given consent for dispensing with the

notices, the dispensation for convening meetings for consideration of the

subject is granted.

C.A. No.92 of 2009 and -3-

C.P. No.28 of 2009

6. The petitioners have also moved an petition for dispensing with

the publication of advertisement in newspapers. In view of the fact that the

meetings themselves have dispensed with, permission granted.

7. The petitioners shall move an appropriate application for

consideration for second motion. In the above terms, petition disposed of.

(K.KANNAN)
JUDGE
February 05, 2009
Pankaj*