9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 414X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9; from the Bank of Maharashtra which would be relevant for the purpose of the settlement of claim between the petitioner and the respondent. Therefore, if this aspect is kept in view and the fact that the Bank of Maharashtra has initiated proceedings against both the petitioner and the respondent before the DRT in O.A. No. 157/2010 and in the said proceedings, the Bank of Maharashtra has obtained an order of restraint against the respondent herein against paying the amount to the petitioner would disclose that the defence as put forth by the respondents herein is a bona fide one and it cannot be considered that the respondent-company are unable to pay their debts. On the other hand, they have been prevented in law against paying the sai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e petitioner has instituted this petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner in that regard on referring to the minutes of meeting at document No.2 has also referred to the statutory notice dated 04.05.2011. The reply dated 05.07.2011 is also referred to indicate that the amount due and payable at ₹ 34,83,215/- has not been disputed by the respondent. In that view, it is contended that the amount is due and payable, the same has also been admitted and as such, it would have to be deemed that the respondents are unable to pay their debts. Therefore, the respondent-company is liable to be wound up is the contention. 4 The respondent has filed the objection statement. Though details have been referred to therein, it is unnecess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of Rydak Syndicate Ltd. -Vs. Roshanlal Agarwal reported in [2007] 139 Company Cases 814 (Calcutta), the said decisions would not be applicable to the present facts wherein the facts which are require to be notices to arrive at a conclusion are as to whether the respondent-company is unable to pay its debts despite the amount being admitted as due and payable to the petitioner. 7. In this regard, the very minutes of the meeting referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioner, on a close perusal would indicate that though the said amount of ₹ 34,83,215/- was admitted as the net amount due and payable by the respondent to the petitioner, in the very meeting it is recorded that the respondents herein will be in a position to re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
