9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 102X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Anant Kasliwal and Vaibhav Kasliwal for the Petitioner. Basant Chhaba for the Respondent. ORDER 1. Instant company petition has been filed U/Ss 433 434 of Companies Act, 1956 ('Co. Act') read with R.95 of Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 seeking winding up of M/s Channel 99-Media Network (P) Ltd ('respondent-Co.'). 2. As alleged, respondent-Co. Was incorporated on 02/05/2008 with the Registrar of Companies, Rajasthan and as per its memorandum Article of Association of the Company, main objects to be pursued on its incorporation inter alia are to entertain and inform the people of Rajasthan State and rest of India through television broadcasting of authentic local culture exhaustive, upto date news and current ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le on 5th of each month commencing from April, 2010 till March 2011 were handed over to petitioner Co. (Tata). It has been averred that when four cheques were presented but returned by Union Bank of India with the endorsement for want of sufficient funds in Bank account of respondent-Co. and after four post-dated cheques on being presented were dishonoured, as informed by the Bank that the respondent-Co. instructed its Bank not to make payments against post-dated cheques referred to in schedule of payment (Ann.A). 4. As alleged, when efforts made by petitioner-Co. having failed continuously frustrated by respondent-Co. with a sole object to avoid payment to its creditors, statutory notice was sent on 29/06/2010 U/Ss 433 434, of Co. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [2009] 89 SCL 205 (SC). 7. However, it is relevant to observe that in course of submissions, on 04/08/2011, Counsel for respondent-Co. on instructions informed that they are ready to settle the dispute, which was seriously opposed on behalf of petitioner-Co., but this Court considered it appropriate to grant time for amicable settlement and directed Counsel for respondent-Co. to ask his client to remain present on next date (18/08/2011). Today, Counsel for petitioner-Co., submits that respondent-Co. never came forward for amicable settlement, pursuant to contention made on last date (04/08/2011). Despite the Court having granted time vide order dt.04/08/2011 to amicably settle the dispute but, it could not be finally resolved and th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is bonafidely disputed and the defence of the Co. is in good faith and its defence is likely to succeed in point of law while the Co. adduces prima facie proof of facts on which its defence depends. 11. It is settled law that for invoking Sections 433( e ) read with S.434(1)( a ) of Co. Act in relation to winding up of a company on the ground of its inability to pay its debt, what is necessary is that despite service of notice by the creditor, the company which was indebted in a sum exceeding one lakh rupees than due, failed and/or neglected to pay the same within three weeks thereafter or to secure or compound for it to reasonable satisfaction of the creditor; and failure of the company to pay the agreed interest or the statutory i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
