9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 452X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e asseveration that debts admittedly payable by the Respondent to the Petitioner had remained outstanding even subsequent to the issuance of a statutory Notice issued under Section 434 of the Companies Act. 1956. Keeping in perspective the nature of the question of law raised before us, we need not go into the genesis or the characteristics of the contract between the parties. So far as Civil Appeal No. 7373 of 2005 is concerned, the claim was for a sum of Rs. 3,54,500/- together with interest at the rate of ten per cent per annum together with Rs. 1,09,958/- deducted by the Respondent on account of the tax deducted at source (TDS). These amounts have remained unpaid even after the receipt of the statutory notice. It is palpably clear that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld be open to the Respondent to pay off the dues together with the interest accrued in eight monthly installments instead of four monthly installments as was directed in the Order dated 24.7.2002. 3. In these circumstances, these orders passed on the concession of the learned counsel for the Respondent were challenged by the Respondent before the Division Bench of the High Court, which we cannot but view as extraordinary. The Division Bench disposed of the Appeal in terms of its Order dated 6.1.2003 with the observation that an application should be preferred before the learned Company Judge for modification of the order, which were assailed before this Court. We had disposed of the Special Leave Petition on 3.3.2003 thus:- "Whether such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. We find no justification whatsoever, in law or in equity, for the rationale adopted by the Division Bench in the impugned Order. The Company Judge had no alternative but to proceed for Winding up of the Respondent Company since it had failed to discharge the admitted debt even after the service of the afore-noted statutory notice. The said junior Advocate of the Respondent had, in fact, displayed legal sagacity in getting the winding-up of the Company postponed and avoided the publication in the Winding-up petition by praying for and obtaining leave to pay the debt in installments. Had he not done so, the Respondent would have had to pay the entire debit at once or face certain commercial death as a consequence publication/citation of Wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
