9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (3) TMI 334X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpanies Act, 1956. 2-3 The factual matrix of the case is as follows : The appellant on 1-6-1997 had entered into an agreement with the respondent for supply of mutton to it. The rates for supply of mutton agreed upon between the parties as mentioned in the agreement dated 1-6-1997 were valid for period of 12 months. The agreement expired on 31-5-1998. The appellant supplied mutton to the respondent for another two months, that is, for June and July, 1998 also, though there was no fresh agreement regarding rates between the parties. The appellant had deposited Rs. 1.25 lakhs with the respondent as security deposit at the time of entering into an agreement on 1-6-1997. After the expiry of the agreement on 31-5-1998, the appellant made suppl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it during June and July, 1998. According to the respondent, the appellant was obliged to supply the mutton at the rate agreed upon between the parties under the agreement dated 1-6-1997. The respondent further contended that it has made payment to the appellant in respect of one bill dated 30-6-1998 at old rates in full and final settlement of the said bill. So far as the other two bills are concerned, it was contended that payment had been made to the appellant by the respondent at old rates during the pendency of the winding up petition before the Company Judge. 8. The appellant also filed a suit for recovery of the balance amount of the three bills pertaining to supply of mutton during the months of June and July, 1998 and the said sui ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 21-9-1998 and relying on these two documents, he contended that this Court should draw an adverse inference against the respondent-company as it failed to send any reply to either of the above two letters. 11. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent drew our attention to the three bills received by the respondent from the appellant in respect of supply of mutton made during June and July, 1998 (at pages 106, 107 and 108 of the file of the Company Petition) and relying on these three bills, she contended that the respondent-company had made payment of all these three bills to the appellant and as such no amount is due and outstanding to the appellant from the respondent. She had further argued that the dispute regarding entit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anies Act, 1956. 14. The findings of the learned Company Judge in respect of the dispute raised by the parties with regard to the three bills pertaining to supply of mutton by the appellant to the respondent-company during June and July, 1998 are as follows :-- "However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and upon going through the records, it is proved and established that the claim of the petitioner for payment at enhanced rate for the mutton supplied after 1-6-1998 gives rise to a disputed question. As to whether or not there was a fresh agreement between the parties wherein both parties agreed for payment of the mutton supplied after 1-6-1998 at an enhanced rate is an issue which would arise for consideration and such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
