2006 (4) TMI 560 - HC - Companies Law

Summary

Issues:
Petition under Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 regarding outstanding amounts for facilities extended by the respondent. Dispute over the unpaid amounts and a statutory notice issued. Claim settlement proposal by the respondent. Court's direction for depositing a substantial sum by the respondent. Consequences of non-compliance or compliance with the court's directive.

Analysis:
The petitioners filed a petition under Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, claiming outstanding amounts for facilities provided to the respondent. The petition highlighted unpaid bills totaling to Rs. 11,15,699.57 for four accounts and a further amount of Rs. 19,69,417.11 for the fifth account, as per a statutory notice sent on 9th July 2005. The petitioners emphasized that there was no dispute regarding the facilities provided or the billed amounts, asserting that the respondent had not made the payments as agreed upon. The petitioners claimed that the property in the mobile handsets vested in them as per the agreement (paragraph 1).

In response, the respondent's counsel mentioned that a settlement for Rs. 1,04,000 had been reached during a meeting between the parties, as recorded in a letter dated 14th February 2005. The respondent also alleged deficiencies in the services provided by the petitioners and contended that the billed amounts were excessive (paragraph 2).

Upon reviewing the petition and the respondent's affidavit-in-reply, the court expressed a prima facie view that the petitioners' claim had not been disputed or settled in full. The court noted that the respondent's offer for a one-time settlement was not accepted by the petitioners, who maintained their claim. Consequently, the court directed the respondent to deposit a substantial sum of Rs. 11,00,000 in court to allow the petitioners to establish their claim through appropriate proceedings (paragraph 3).

The respondent agreed to deposit the specified amount within eight weeks without prejudice to their rights and contentions in potential future proceedings. The court warned that failure to deposit the sum within the stipulated time would result in the petition being admitted, and the petitioners could proceed with further steps as per the Rules (paragraph 4, 5).

If the amount was deposited within the specified time, the petitioners had two weeks to file a suit. Failure to do so would entitle the respondent to withdraw the deposited amount. The court clarified that this order was solely for the disposal of the petition, leaving the merits of the claim and obligations of the parties under the agreement open for future litigation (paragraph 6, 7).