9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Review of winding-up order based on non-compliance with statutory provisions. 2. Restoration of a previously dismissed company petition. 3. Justification for passing the winding-up order based on the company's assets. 4. Disbursement of deposited amount post-appellate court's order. Analysis: Issue 1: Review of winding-up order based on non-compliance with statutory provisions The petitioner sought a review of the winding-up order on the grounds of non-compliance with Rule 24(2) of the Companies (Court) Rules 1959, as the notice of advertisement of the petition was not published in the Official Gazette. The court acknowledged the error in the order and allowed the review partly by deleting the incorrect references to the Official Gazette in the original judgment. The court emphasized that failure to publish in the Official Gazette was an irregularity, not an illegality, and cited relevant case law to support its decision. Issue 2: Restoration of a previously dismissed company petition The court clarified that the order of restoration of a petition dismissed for default could not be considered in reviewing the winding-up order. It highlighted the court's inherent powers under Rule 9 of the Company (Court) Rules to pass orders for restoration, indicating that the restoration order was not without jurisdiction. Therefore, the ground for restoration failed in the review application. Issue 3: Justification for passing the winding-up order based on the company's assets The court addressed the contention that the company's assets were sufficient to cover the existing debt, questioning the justification for the winding-up order. It emphasized that in a review application, there could be no reappreciation of the material on record or reassessment of evidence. Since the applicant failed to file an affidavit in reply denying the claims made in the petition, the grounds related to the company's assets did not hold in the review process. Issue 4: Disbursement of deposited amount post-appellate court's order The court noted that the appellate court's order directed the company court to deal with the amount deposited by the applicant. However, due to the winding-up order in place, the court could not prefer one creditor over others. It instructed the amount to be invested in a fixed deposit account in the name of the Registrar and subsequently handed over to the Official Liquidator for distribution among the creditors, thereby rejecting the applicant's request to disburse the amount to a specific creditor. In conclusion, the court partially allowed the review application by correcting the errors in the original judgment related to the Official Gazette references. The court dismissed the grounds related to the company's assets and restoration of the dismissed petition. Additionally, it directed the investment of the deposited amount for eventual distribution among the creditors in accordance with the winding-up order.
|
