Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CRA/253/2010 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL
REVISION APPLICATION No. 253 of 2010
=========================================================
HIMACHAL
FIBERS LIMITED THROUGH RAJESH GUPTA - Applicant(s)
Versus
SUBHAM
CHEMICALS THROUGH PROPRIETOR PRAVIN JAIN- HUF - Opponent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
RAJESH K SAVJANI for
Applicant(s) : 1,
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Opponent(s) : 1,
MR
SUREN M SHAH for Opponent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
Date
: 07/02/2011
ORAL
ORDER
Today, on behalf of respondent,
affidavit is placed on record. Copy thereof is served to learned
advocate Mr. Savjani, which is taken on record.
Heard learned advocate Mr. RK
Savjani on behalf of petitioner, learned advocate Mr. Suren M. Shah
appearing for respondent no. 1.
I have considered submissions made
by both learned advocates and also perused order passed by Trial
Court in order 37 Rule 4 of Civil Procedure Code. The question
involved in present application would require detailed examination.
Hence, Rule. Interim relief in terms of para 13(B) till matter is
finally decided by this Court. Learned advocate Mr. Shah waives
service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent.
It is made clear by this Court
while passing interim order in favour of petitioner that BIFR
proceeding Misc. Application no. 577/BC/2010 is concluded on
13/10/2010. The following order has been passed by BIFR, which is as
under:
“1. The
Misc. Application having registration No. 577/BC/2010 dated
5/10/2010 has been filed by Shri Dinesh Kumar, Advocate Bhagwati &
Associates of the company praying that this Hon’ble Board may be
pleased to:
a) To
discharge the company from the purview of SICA as the networth of
the company has turned positive.
b) To
pass any other order as your honour may deem appropriate.
2. In
the hearing held today (13.10.2010), the representative of the
company submitted that this MA has been filed for discharge from the
purview of SICA as the networth of the company has turned positive
amounting to Rs. 13.58 crore as per ABS for the Financial Year
2009-10. It was further submitted that the company is working
satisfactorily and earning profit from the last year.
3. The
representative of IDBI (MA) confirmed that the networth of the
company has turned positive and IDBI has no objection for
discharging the company from the purview of SICA.
4. After
considering the material on record and submissions made, the Bench
discharged the company from the purview of SICA as the networth of
the company has turned positive amounting to Rs. 13.58 crores.
Secured Creditors, Unsecured Creditors, if any, as well as,
Government Department are at liberty to recover the outstanding
dues, if any, from the company and the protection available under
SICA shall not be available to the company henceforth.
Let
a copy of this order be circulated to all concerned.”
In light of proceeding comes to an
end before BIFR, it is open for respondent to initiate
action/proceeding against present petitioner for recovering an
amount in accordance with law. Naturally, as and when such action
will initiate by respondent, it is open for petitioner to object or
resist same which is permissible under law including maintainability
of fresh proceeding if so initiated by respondent.
(H.K.RATHOD,
J)
asma
Top