2012 (12) TMI 1128 - HC - Companies Law

Summary

Issues involved: Application for substitution of Mishapar Investments Limited in place of Sicom Limited in Company Petition No.34 of 2009 pending before the Court.

Summary:
1. The applicant Company filed an application seeking permission to convene meetings of secured creditors for a compromise scheme. Subsequently, Company Petition No.34 of 2009 was filed under Section 391(1) of the Companies Act for sanctioning the compromise scheme approved by secured creditors.

2. Company Application No.1 of 2009 was filed to restrain Sicom Limited, a secured creditor, from legal proceedings under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act. The court stayed Sicom Limited's actions. However, the application was later dismissed, leading to an appeal by the applicant Company.

3. The Division Bench allowed Sicom Limited's appeal against the Company Petition, stating it was not maintainable under Section 391(1) of the Act. The applicant Company then appealed to the Apex Court through Special Leave Petitions.

4. During the pendency of the Special Leave Petitions, Sicom Limited assigned its debts, rights, and interests to Mishapar Investments Limited. The Apex Court, upon settlement between the parties, allowed the substitution of Mishapar Investments Limited in place of Sicom Limited. The matter was remanded to the Company Judge for consideration under Section 391 of the Companies Act.

5. The parties had no objections to the substitution, and the Court allowed the application based on the Apex Court's order. Mishapar Investments Limited was permitted to replace Sicom Limited in Company Petition No.34 of 2009.