Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
COMP/215/2006 3/ 6 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
COMPANY
PETITION No. 215 of 2006
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
=========================================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To be
referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=========================================================
MONAJ
K. SHAH - Petitioner(s)
Versus
CRYSTAL
WATCHES LTD. - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
VIMAL M PATEL for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR PAVAN S GODIAWALA for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 01/05/2007
ORAL JUDGMENT
Present
Company Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Sections 433
and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 for an appropriate order of
winding up of the Company, Crystal Watches Ltd.,.
2. It
is the contention on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has
let out the premises at 407, Ashwamegh House 5, Smruti Kunj Society,
Navrangpura, Ahmedabad and the respondent company is in possession of
the said premises; that lease amount/rent to the extent of Rs.
2,68,800 is due and payable by the respondent; and inspite of
repeated requests and demands the respondent Company has neglected
and failed to pay the aforesaid amount to the petitioner. It is
further submitted that as the said amount was not paid the petitioner
was required to serve a statutory notice upon the respondent Company
as required under Section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 and inspite
of the service of said statutory notice the respondent company has
neglected and failed to make payment within 21 days and therefore
statutory presumption can be raised that the respondent company is
unable to pay the debts. Therefore it is requested to allow the
present Company Petition and to pass an appropriate order of winding
up of the respondent company, Crystal Watches Ltd.
3. While
admitting the present Company Petition, this Court passed a detailed
order observing that the respondent Company had replied to the
statutory notice in which the company has never disputed the amount
payable. However, the only submission made was that they are facing
financial crisis and as soon as the financial position improves the
payment will be made. This Court also observed that the said reply
was dated 31st March 2006 and more than one year has
passed thereafter but the respondent Company has not paid any amount
to the petitioner. This Court also observed that in the
affidavit-in-reply filed in the present Company Petition also the
claim is not disputed. After the admission, there is no changed
circumstance. The admission of the present Company Petition was
directed to be advertised in two local newspapers, i.e., ?SThe
Indian Express?? [English Daily] and ?SSandesh?? [Gujarati
Daily] both Ahmedabad Editions and affidavit of advertisement dated
28th April 2007 is placed on record submitting that
admission of the petition has been published in aforesaid two local
newspapers. Inspite of the same, nobody has raised any objection
against granting of relief in the Company Petition.
4. Considering
the fact that the debt is not disputed and that an amount of Rs.
2,68,800 is due and payable, and inspite of service of statutory
notice and thereafter the respondent company has failed and neglected
to pay the said amount, the Company is required to be wound up. The
respondent Company has also not come out with any concrete proposal
to make payment of the dues. It is an admitted position that the
respondent Company is not in position to pay any amount to the
petitioner as on date. It is also not the case on behalf of the
respondent that the respondent company is a running and a
profit-making company. Under the circumstances, the present
Company Petition is required to be allowed. The respondent Company
is, therefore, ordered to be wound up.
5. For
the reasons as stated above, the petition is allowed. The respondent
company is directed to be wound up. The Official Liquidator attached
with this Court is appointed as ‘Official Liquidator’ for the
respondent company. The Official Liquidator is hereby directed to
take possession of the properties (movable or immovable) of the
respondent company along with its Bank Accounts, Cheque Books, Cash,
Account Books etc., after preparing the inventories and panchnama.
The Official Liquidator shall submit his report within a period of
three months. If required, he can take service of the Official
Valuer
for the purpose of preparation of
inventory
report, possession note, etc. No costs.
[
M.R. Shah, J. ]
rmr.
Top