9911796707
TMI Blog1951 (4) TMI 19X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or hearing, this court in the exercise of such power may direct that the petition be taken off the file or may order that the petition be kept on file, but that the hearing of the petition be adjourned until such time as the court thinks fit and further may restrain the advertisement of the petition. I have no doubt that I have similar powers at the time of the presentation of the petition. If a proper case is made out, the court may at the time of the presentation of the petition for winding up ( a ) refuse to admit the petition or ( b ) may admit the petition and adjourn the hearing of the petition until such time as the court thinks fit. This is a salutary power which this court has and exercises for the same reason for which it may restrain the advertisement of the petition. MacLeod J. in In re Pioneer Bank Ltd. observed as follows: "There is no obligation whatever on the court to admit a petition merely because it is presented. In the first place it must, as I have already stated, allege facts which, if proved, would justify an order for winding up a company and therefore perusal is necessary. But even if a petition does allege such facts, then the Judge has a discreti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld be if an application for taking the petition off the file and for restraining the advertisement of the petition had been made. Mr. R. Chaudhuri on behalf of the company contended that the petition is abuse of the process of the court because ( a ) the debt on which it is founded is disputed bona fide, ( b ) it has been presented with ulterior motives. I will deal with the merits of the case only so far as it is absolutely necessary for the present purpose. I decline to express any final opinion on the merits nor is it possible to do so on the present materials. His Lordship held on the materials on record that there was a bona fide dispute as to the debt and proceeded. At the hearing of this matter Mr. R. Chaudhuri on behalf of the company offered to furnish security to the satisfaction of the Registrar for the full amount of the claim of the petitioner so that the petitioner may be assured of realising its dues after disputes are adjudicated upon and the amount, if any, due to the petitioner is established beyond doubt. Mr. S. Chaudhuri on behalf of the petitioner after taking full instructions refused to accept this offer. In coming to the conclusion that the debt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for winding up. Greaves J. dismissed a petition by the company for stay of all proceedings in connection with the winding up petition but the appeal court ordered the stay of the winding up proceedings until the determination of the two suits. Sir John Romilly, M.R., in In re Brighton Club and Norfolk Hotel Company Ltd. observed as follows: "Suppose the company said, 'We are now willing to pay the debt then this question would arise what is the debt, what is really due to the petitioner on the claim? I must then take the accounts and do the Very thing which cannot be done except by bill, unless in cases where there is fraud and collusion, and I should thus take complicated and contested accounts, between solvent persons, under the powers of an Act of Parliament which meant to do nothing but to wind up insolvent companies and to make them pay their debt, so far as their assets would extend. Far from being insolvent this company is carrying on a thriving business which I am asked to stop merely because there is a quarrel between the company and their contractor as to what is due to him." In Mohamed Amin v. Dominion of India, the company was assessed to income-tax for a h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of disputed debt and is so treated by the appeal court in The Company v. Rameswar Singh. Vaughan Williams J. in In re A Company observed as follows: "In my judgment, if I am satisfied that a petition is not presented in good faith and for the legitimate purpose of obtaining a winding up order, but for other purposes, such as putting pressure on the company, I ought to stop it if its continuance is likely to cause damage to the company." Mr. R. Chaudhuri asked me to infer mala fides from the following facts: ( a ) The rejection of the offer as to security and the unwillingness of the petitioner to face the trial of an action show that the object of the petitioner is to put pressure on the company and that its real object is not to wind up the company. The action can be heard within a short time and if the claim of the petitioner is genuine the realisation of the dues will be delayed for some time but the petitioner's claim on being fully secure, the petitioner has nothing else to lose, ( b ) Disputes had arisen long prior to the presentation of the petition and there were prolonged negotiations for settlement. While I feel that there is some force in this contention I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
