9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (11) TMI 59X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e creditors stand settled, the petitions seeking winding up of the respondent-company are also dismissed as no cause of action survives in the petitions. No justification in transposing the petitioner-creditor in CP No. 73 of 2007 to support the winding up order. The claim of the said petitioner shall be considered in accordance with law in the said petition separately. CP No.99 of 2005 is already fixed for 11-11-2010. The claim of the said creditor shall be considered on the aforesaid date. Thus the order dated 12-8-2010 passed in CP Nos. 56, 57, 59 and 60 of 2008 is recalled. The petitions are restored to their original number X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2008. 4. It is the case of the applicant that the counsel engaged by the Company could not appear on the date fixed on account of the fact that he was busy and the counsel instructed by him did not appear on account of bona fide mistake. Learned counsel for the applicants further stated that the claim of the petitioners in CP Nos. 56, 57, 59 and 60 of 2008 stands settled in its entirety and that the company is ready and willing to reimburse the expenses incurred by the Official Liquidator after the order of winding up was passed by this Court. 5. Ms. Divya Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the Official Liquidator has filed reply to the applications in Court. In the reply filed, it is averred that the intimation regarding winding up or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r of winding up for the reason that none has put in appearance on behalf of the company. As per the averments made in the application, it is apparent that the company has engaged a counsel, who was not available on 12-8-2010 and has instructed his Associate Shri Prahlad Bhagat, Advocate, to appear before this Court. Shri Bhagat could not come to the Court due to his personal engagements. The application for recall of the order has been filed on 27-8-2010, i.e., within 15 days of the order of winding up and much before the Official Liquidator has received the information of the winding up order. Since the absence of the Company was on account of mistake, negligence or carelessness of the Advocate, I find that sufficient cause is made out for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner-creditor in CP No. 73 of 2007 to support the winding up order. The claim of the said petitioner shall be considered in accordance with law in the said petition separately. CP No.99 of 2005 is already fixed for 11-11-2010. The claim of the said creditor shall be considered on the aforesaid date. 10. In view of the above, the order dated 12-8-2010 passed in CP Nos. 56, 57, 59 and 60 of 2008 is recalled. The petitions are restored to their original number. Since the claim of the petitioners stand settled, all the petitions are dismissed as infructuous. 11. The Official Liquidator may communicate the expenses incurred by the Office of Official Liquidator within two weeks. The same shall be paid to the Official Liquidator within two weeks ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
