9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1012X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder :- a). The company petition accordingly is admitted and shall be advertised in two local newspapers, namely (i) Free Press Journal (in English) and Navshakti (in Marathi) as also in the Maharashtra Government Gazette. Any delay in publication of the advertisement in the Maharashtra Government Gazette, and any resultant inadequacy of notice shall not invalidate such advertisement or notice and shall not constitute non-compliance with this direction or with the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959. b). The company petition is made returnable after eight weeks. The petitioner shall deposit ₹ 10,000/- towards publication charges with the Prothonotary & Senior Master, under intimation to the Company Registrar, within two weeks from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. On 20th May, 2013, the respondent issued a cheque in the sum of ₹ 3.00 lakh as part payment in favour of the petitioner. On 18th June, 2013, the respondent company issued another cheque of ₹ 3.00 lakh as part payment to the petitioner. On 31st August, 2013, the respondent company issued a cheque of ₹ 1.00 lakh as part payment. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that on 1st October, 2013, the petitioner addressed an e-mail to the respondent and called upon the respondent to pay the outstanding amount of ₹ 10,84,000/-. It was the case of the petitioner that due to oversight the amount outstanding mentioned in the said e-mail was ₹ 10,70,000/- as against the amount of ₹ 10,84,000/-. On 21st Octo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rdingly filed this company petition. According to the petitioner, the petitioner has to recover a sum of ₹ 14,63,421/- from the respondent as on the date of filing of the company petition. The respondent has filed affidavit in reply to this petition. Rejoinder is filed by the petitioner. 7. Mr. Khandeparkar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner invited my attention to the various annexures annexed to the petition and submits that there was inadvertent error in two emails sent by the petitioner. He submits that instead of ₹ 10,84,000/-, inadvertently an amount of ₹ 10,70,000/- was mentioned. He also invited my attention to the reply to the said e-mail sent by the respondent and would submit that even according ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ver raised any such issue of alleged defective goods. 11. Mr.Saluja, learned counsel for the respondent on the other hand submits that there were over writings in the invoices annexed to the petition. He does not dispute that the respondent had not addressed any letters during the course of supply of various material by the petitioner, alleging supply of defective goods. He submits that in one of the e-mail sent by the petitioner, the petitioner demanded a sum of ₹ 10,70,000/-, whereas in another e-mail the petitioner has claimed an amount of ₹ 10,84,000/-. He submits that since there is a difference in the claim made by the petitioner in the correspondence, on that ground alone, the petition shall be dismissed. 12. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e learned counsel placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in case of Tata Finance Limited, Mumbai vs. Kanoria Sugar General Manufacturing Company Limited, Mumbai, 2002(1) Mh.L.J. 617 and in particular paragraphs 8 and 11. He submits that even if according to the respondent the correct outstanding amount of the petitioner is ₹ 10,70,000.- and not ₹ 10,84,000/- since the amount involved is more than ₹ 500/-, the company petition cannot be dismissed on the ground of the alleged discrepancy in the amount claimed. 17. The respondent did not reply to the statutory notice and did not pay any amount, a presumption thus has to be drawn against the respondent that the respondent is unable to pay its debts. 18. I ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e invoices from payment of interest. In any event since the admitted liability is more than ₹ 500/-, the petition deserves to be admitted. 21. In my view, since the respondent has failed to pay the admitted dues, the petitioner has made out a case for grant of interim relief in terms of prayer clause (d). However, it is made clear that the respondent shall be permitted to deal with or dispose of the assets in ordinary course of business. The respondent shall maintain accounts and shall furnish a copy of such account every six months from today to the petitioner. 22. I therefore, pass the following order :- a). The company petition accordingly is admitted and shall be advertised in two local newspapers, namely (i) Free ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
