9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (11) TMI 420X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... committed by the learned Company Judge in ordering the winding up of the appellant-company. Appeal dismissed. - O.S.A. NO. 94 OF 2005 - - - Dated:- 28-11-2007 - K.L. MANJUNATH AND ARALI NAGARAJ, JJ. Manjunath H. Datar for the Respondent. JUDGMENT K. L. Manjunath, J. - The appellant was the respondent in the Company Petition No. 180 of 2001 ( Standard Industrial Engg. Co. v. Bellary Power (India) (P.) Ltd. [2006] 133 Comp. Cas. 787 1 (Kar.), which petition was instituted by the respondent hereinunder section 433( e ) and ( f ) read with section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956. 2. On 21-11-2005, the company petition filed by the respondent has been allowed and the appellant-company is ordered to be wound up. Acc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cted by the learned Company Judge on the ground that the same has not been filed on time. After hearing counsel for both the parties, the Company Judge has allowed the petition. Challenging the same, the present appeal is filed. 4. We have heard learned counsel appearing for both the parties. 5. According to the appellant, the Company Judge has committed an error in not allowing the appellant to file the statement of objections. It is further contended that nowhere in the company petition, the respondent has averred that the appellant is incapable of paying the debts to the respondent. It is further contended that when the respondent has obtained a decree from the Andhra Pradesh Industry Facilitation Council under the provisions of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere obtaining of a decree from the council or a civil court will not disentitle the respondent to file a company petition for winding up when the appellant-company is incapable of discharging the debts. 7. Having heard counsel for the parties what is required to be considered by us in this appeal is whether the Company Judge has committed an error in ordering winding up of the appellant-company. 8. Admittedly, the bills raised by the respondent are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the appellant has received the statutory notice got issued by the respondent under the Companies Act. It is also not in dispute that no reply has been sent by the appellant to show that there is really a dispute in existence between the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
