9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (4) TMI 389X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d counsel appearing for the parties and perused the application papers. 3. The Company-in-liquidation was ordered to be wound up by this Court vide order dated 01.04.2004 passed in Co. P. No. 166/2001 and other connected petitions. Subsequent thereto, the erstwhile Directors of the Company-in-liquidation are stated to have filed their statement of affairs. In the enclosed statement relating to the details of the amount due from the debtors to the Foundry division at Harihar, the name of the respondent company is indicated as being due in a sum of Rs. 6,47,394.79 ps. The receivable ledger for the period 1.6.2000 to 01.04.2004 has also reflected the said amount as against the name of the respondent herein with reference to the invoices under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e respondent-company is the contention. 5. Since the respondent had disputed the claim put forth in the application, the matter was set down for recording the evidence which has been recorded. In that light, learned counsel for the parties have been heard. 6. One Sri Jambayya, working as a paid Assistant in the office of the Official Liquidator has tendered his evidence by way of affidavit claiming a sum of Rs. 6,47,394.79 by making a similar statement as made in the application. The list based on which the claim has been made is marked as Ex. P1 and the receivable ledger relating to sundry debtors for the period from 01.06.2000 to 01.04.2004 is marked as Ex.P2 and the relevant entries relating to the invoices under which the claims are p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that was put forth and the document that was marked at Ex.D2 relating to the rejections and the statement as maintained by them from the period from 01.04.2000 to 31.08.2000 it would indicate that the invoices claimed as dues in the statement maintained by the Company-in-liquidation are the very same invoices, the supplies made thereunder have been rejected. For the purpose of demonstration and better understanding, a perusal of Ex.P2 as pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondent would refer to the invoice bearing No. S2007054/1 which has been indicated in the statement for the periods 01.06.2000 to 01.04.2004 relied on by the applicants. A corresponding entry to the same is noticed in Ex.D2 maintained by the Respondents for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
