Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 1984 (3) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1984 (3) TMI 321 - HC - Companies Law

Issues:
- Winding-up petition leading to liquidation of the company
- Prosecution against directors for failure to file statement of affairs
- Landlord seeking restoration of premises due to rent arrears
- Applications to prevent delivery of possession by managing director
- Petition under section 391 of the Companies Act for company revival

Winding-up Petition and Liquidation:
The company, Nona Sona Exports Pvt. Ltd., faced liquidation following a winding-up petition by a creditor due to substantial unpaid liabilities. Despite attempts to set aside the winding-up order, the company failed. Prosecution against directors is ongoing for not submitting the statement of affairs, with a warrant issued at one point for a director's production.

Landlord's Restoration Application:
The landlord sought restoration of premises due to significant rent arrears, leading to a court direction for possession delivery. The managing director made multiple attempts to prevent possession delivery, citing agreements for company revival, but the court found these claims unsubstantiated.

Petition for Company Revival:
A petition under section 391 of the Companies Act was filed for the company's revival, proposing a scheme. The court reviewed the scheme and found it lacking credibility, suggesting its purpose was to delay possession delivery. The company's financial status, lack of balance sheets, and substantial debts were highlighted, leading to the rejection of the revival scheme.

Legal Proceedings and Possession Delivery:
Separate ejectment proceedings were noted, pursued by the ex-managing director despite lacking authority post-liquidation. The court directed the official liquidator to hand over possession to the landlord promptly, dismissing all applications aimed at retaining possession and delaying the landlord's rights. The court emphasized the need for compliance with possession delivery within a specified timeframe.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates