Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1998 (9) TMI 473

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... al Commission. The respondent has also raised the objection to the jurisdiction of this court, because, according tb it, by the pendency of a petition before the National Commission this court loses its jurisdiction. That amount deposited be not disbursed to the petitioners. In order to appreciate the point raised in this application, it must be stated at the outset that there is a chequered history of litigation and round of applications filed by the respondent. This is not the first application of its kind. A number of applications had earlier been filed by the respondent before various forums seeking modifications of their orders which I would like to pen down here, before I deal with this application on the merits. The petitioners h .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ent respondent against the issuing of citation, stay was granted by the appellate authority. But the said appeal was subsequently dismissed. Pursuant to the order of the National Commission, the respondent deposited a sum of Rs. 37 lakhs. This court, vide order dated January 16, 1998, observed that since a substantial sum of money was yet to be paid by the respondent to the flat buyers, therefore, citation should be taken out as per the order dated August 16, 1995. It was also observed that in case the respondent deposited the balance amount within two months for being disbursed to the flat buyers, citation will not be issued. The order of January 16, 1998, was not complied with by the respondent, therefore, this court vide order dated Marc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e also stated that the payment would be made on or before August 3, 1998. Mr. Harish Uppal also stated that in case the payments were not made within the time granted by the court, the respondent would not oppose the application of the petitioners for winding up of the company. This statement of Mr. Harish Uppal had been made on the instructions of Mr. H. L. Soin, director of the respondent-company. The flat owners/ petitioners agreed for the extension of time for payment of the balance amount because their amounts were due since the year 1989. Keeping in view the statement of counsel for the respondent, Mr. Harish Uppal, this court directed the respondent-company to make payment of the remaining amount to the ten flat buyers on or before A .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... due. However, keeping in view that the National Commission had passed certain orders regarding payment, this court deemed it fit to direct the respondent to deposit that amount besides the balance amount due from the respondent-company to the ten flat buyers. This order was within the competence of this court. Moreover, pendency of proceedings before the National Commission is no bar to this court passing orders nor would directing the respondent to deposit the amount as directed by the said Commission mean that the company court has no jurisdiction. Hence, I find no merit in this objection. So far as the four petitioners are concerned against whom the respondent-company raised certain objections, namely, Mr. Jalaj Sharma, Mr. C. L. Joshi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s not paid within the time granted by this court the respondent would not oppose the application of the petitioner for winding up of the company. This statement was made by counsel for the respondent at the instructions of Mr. H. L. Soin, director of the respondent-company. It was pursuant to the statement of counsel at the Bar that directions were given to the respondent-company to make payment of the remaining amount to the ten flat buyers. The Registry was also directed to calculate the amounts to which each of the petitioner was entitled. The Registry has now calculated the amount which the respondent-company is liable to pay to the ten flat buyers. The ratio as to how this has to be disbursed has also been calculated by the Registry. A .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates