IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No.3443 of 2003
Samir Kumar Ghosh ... ... Petitioner
Versus
Nalanda Ceramic & Industries Ltd. C/296
Ashok Nagar, Ranchi & ors. ... ... Respondents
With
W.P.(C) No.3933 of 2003
With
W.P.(C) No.3934 of 2003
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.R. PRASAD
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. P. Modi, Advocate
For the JSEB : Mr. V.P. Singh, Sr. Advocate
For the respondent No.5 : Mr. Lakhan Sharma, Advocate
-----
07/28.02.2011
. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was a Director of Nalanda Ceramic & Industries Ltd. Subsequently,
he ceased to be the Director w.e.f. 21.09.1981. However, he was surprised to
receive a notice, issued in terms of Section 7 of the Bihar and Orissa Pubic
Demand Recovery Act, wherefrom an amount of Rs.44,76,846.18 was sought
to be realized from the petitioner though the petitioner at the relevant point of
time i.e. from January, 1986 to December, 1989, when default was made in
making payment of the electricity dues, was not the Director and that before
notice was issued in terms of Section 7 of the Bihar and Orissa Pubic
Demand Recovery Act, certificate had been drawn in the name of the company
itself. Still notice was given under Section 7 to this petitioner and, therefore,
the petitioner has moved to this Court for quashing of the said notice as
contained in Memo No.153 dated 24.04.2003 (Annexure-6).
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further
submits that in the year 1984-85, the Board had entered into an agreement
with the Company for supply of the Electricity of 500 KVA and on account of
that, whatever amount was due against the company, that was with respect to
new agreement, which the petitioner had nothing to do with and as such the
petitioner is never liable to pay certificate amount. It was also argued that the
said Company is under liquidation and an order relating to winding up of the
Company has already been passed in the year 1989 and hence, the Company
cannot be proceeded with the matter relating to realization of any dues on
account of the provision as contained in Section 446(1) of the Companies Act
without the leave of the Company Court.
However, Mr. V.P. Singh, learned Senior counsel
appearing for the Electricity Board submits that he was not aware about this
case and, therefore, the case be adjourned for a week so that in the meantime,
he may get ready with the case.
As prayed for, let all these cases on 08.03.2011.
Let a copy of this order be handed over to Mr. V.P. Singh,
learned Senior Counsel appearing for the J.S.E.B.
(R.R. Prasad, J.)
Ravi/