9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Petition under section 433(e) of the Companies Act, 1956 for winding up order due to unpaid debts, including arrears of salary and notice period. - Contention on the maintainability of the petition based on the definition of 'debt' under sections 433 and 434 of the Act. Analysis: The petitioner filed a petition under section 433(e) of the Companies Act, 1956, seeking a winding up order against the respondent company for its inability to pay admitted debts, which included arrears of salary, notice period payment, and interest. The respondent company contested the petition, arguing that the petitioner was not an employee with a valid appointment order. However, the court found prima facie evidence that the petitioner had provided services to the company, was remunerated monthly, had outstanding payments, and was no longer engaged by the company after a certain date. The respondent raised disputes challenging the maintainability of the petition, particularly arguing that arrears of salary do not constitute a 'debt' as defined in the Act. Citing a Madhya Pradesh High Court decision, the respondent contended that a petition by an employee for non-payment of salary is not maintainable. However, the court disagreed, emphasizing that while 'salary' and 'debt' are distinct, unpaid salary becomes a debt when due. Reference was made to section 529A of the Act, which treats unpaid workman dues as debts akin to those owed to secured creditors, supporting the inclusion of unpaid salary as a debt under sections 433(e) and 434. The court acknowledged its discretion in ordering winding up for non-payment of salary but affirmed the maintainability of the petition under section 433(e). Noting the respondent's failure to respond to statutory notices, the court invoked the deeming provision under section 434, admitting the company petition. However, the court stayed further proceedings for two weeks to allow an amicable settlement between the parties. The respondent was given the opportunity to report payment of the arrears of salary within the specified period to potentially resolve the matter outside court. This judgment clarifies the interpretation of 'debt' in the context of unpaid salary, affirming the inclusion of such dues in petitions for winding up under the Companies Act, 1956. It underscores the statutory provisions treating unpaid workman dues as debts and emphasizes the court's discretion in winding up orders for non-payment of salary while upholding the maintainability of petitions seeking such relief.
|
