9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 575X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ide dispute. Accordingly admit the present petition. The Official Liquidator attached to this court is appointed as the Provisional Liquidator. He is directed to take over all the assets, books of accounts and records of the respondent-company forthwith. The citations be published in the Delhi editions of the newspapers “Statesman” (English) and “Veer Arjun” (Hindi), as well as in the Delhi Gazette, at least 14 days prior to the next date of hearing - CO.PET. 759/2014 and CA No. 4921/2016, 99/2017 - - - Dated:- 11-4-2018 - MR. JAYANT NATH J. Petitioner Through M.V.K. Monga, Adv. Respondent Through Mr. Paritosh Budhiraja and Mr. Vimal Dubey, Advs. JAYANT NATH, J. (Oral) 1. This petition is filed under Sections 433 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ever, the said Ready Mix Concrete when tested for quality and comprehensive strength by way Cube Test/Rebound Hammer Test, did not qualify the requisite standards as prescribed in IS 13311 . In view thereof, the respondent suggested to the petitioner to carry out a Core Test as recommended by the Structural Engineer. However, the petitioner did not take the necessary steps to have the Core Test done. Hence, it is pleaded that the petitioner supplied sub-standard material to the respondent and the respondent is not liable to pay any amount to the petitioner. The balance confirmation letters have been denied stating that they are fabricated and stating that they do not bear the signatures of any authorised person of the respondent Company. R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lding material was not as per the desired quality, the respondent had to take steps so that the material can be returned to the petitioner. It is not conceivable that the material has to be consumed first before it is tested for quality. 6. Further, there is no purchase order or agreement on record that specifies the quality of the material. I may note that there are two e-mails placed on record by the respondent raising the issue of quality. The first e-mail is dated 02.12.2013 whereby the respondent has stated that after 28 days comprehensive test, the concrete has proved sub-standard after they did Rebound Hammer Test. A suggestion is made that a Core Test be carried out for a final decision. A reminder to this effect was allegedly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amp of the respondent where the outstanding balance of ₹ 9.26 lakhs as on 28.02.2013 has been confirmed. There is another balance confirmation letter which confirms the balance as on 15.10.2013 where again authorised signatory of the respondent has signed. It is of course true that the respondent have denied their signatures on these documents. Other than a bald denial, there is no attempt to explain as to how the stamp of the company has been affixed on these documents and who has actually signed these documents representing himself to be a representative of the respondent. The respondent has sought to wish away the balance confirmation letters by a bald submission simply denying the signatures. 9. In my opinion, all the above f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It is settled law that if the creditor's debt is bona fide disputed on substantial grounds, the court should dismiss the petition and leave the creditor first to establish his claim in an action, lest there is danger of abuse of winding-up procedure. The Company Court always retains the discretion, but a party to a dispute should not be allowed to use the threat of winding-up petition as a means of forcing the company to pay a bona fide disputed debt. 11. As noted above, in the facts of the above case the respondent company has failed to show any bona fide dispute. 12. I accordingly admit the present petition. The Official Liquidator attached to this court is appointed as the Provisional Liquidator. He is directed to take o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
