9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1167X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the Respondent forthwith. The OL shall also prepare a complete inventory of all the assets of the Respondent before sealing the premises in which they are kept. He may also seek the assistance of a valuer to value the assets. He is permitted to take the assistance of the local police authorities, if required - Decided in favour of Petitioner. - CO.PET. 475/2011 - - - Dated:- 3-9-2013 - R.V. EASWAR, J. For the Appellant : Dhruv Wahi and Ashish Sindhu. For the Respondent : C. Mukund, Ashok Jain, Pankaj Jain, Ekta Bhasin, Amit Kesaria and Ms. Firdouse Qutbwani . JUDGMENT:- R.V. Easwar, J.: This is a petition filed under section 433(e), 434 and 439 of the Companies Act by M/s Grandeur Collection seeking winding up of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 44, Industrial Area, Lawrence Road, New Delhi-110035. The alternate notice was addressed to A.K.-66-67, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi-110052. Notice was also sent by e-mail to the respondent company at the latter's e-mail ID which was "[email protected]". Whereas the notice sent to the registered office was returned unserved with the postal remark "left", there was no reply to the notice sent through e-mail. It is in the aforesaid circumstances that the present petition was filed in this Court. 4. The defence taken by the respondent company is that the garments supplied by the petitioner were not of the desired quality but were of inferior quality about which complaints had been lodged many times but to no effect. It is further submitted tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eceipt thereof is not denied. So long as the statutory notice was sent to the e-mail ID of the company as intimated to the ROC, nothing is to be gained by contending that all earlier communications between the petitioner and the respondent company were made through a different e-mail ID. 7. It is further noted that initially the respondent company acknowledged a debt of Rs.22,60,758/- in favour of the petitioner and this is also supported by a statement for the period 1.4.2009 to 31.3.2010 sent by the respondent itself. However, after adjusting the amount of debit notes issued by the respondent company, the petitioner brought down the outstanding balance to Rs.22,71,418/-. Responding to this communication from the petitioner, the responde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
