9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1264X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it advanced a loan of Rs. 10 lakhs to the company, which was repayable on or before November 30, 2014 with interest at the rate 21%, per annum, compounded quarterly. A copy of the said agreement dated May 23, 2014 has been disclosed as Annexure-"C" to the petition. The said sum of Rs. 10 lakhs was paid by the petitioner to the company by RTGS ,through its bank account maintained with the IDBI Bank, Brabourne Road Branch, The petitioner has disclosed a copy of the relevant portion of its bank statement showing payment of Rs. 10 lakhs to the company through RTGS. Since the company did not repay the said sum of Rs. 10 lakhs as per the agreed terms, within November 30, 2014 by a letter dated December 04, 2014 the petitioner called upon the comp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lso alleged the petitioner to be a friendly creditor of the Kanoi Group, who in collusion and connivance with the petitioner have forged and fabricated the loan agreement and other letters and documents referred to in the said letter dated May 05, 2015 which are not available in its records. The company called upon the petitioner to furnish copies of the said loan agreement and other documents referred to in its said notice dated May 05, 2015. By a letter dated June 03, 2015 addressed to the company's advocate, the petitioner denied and disputed all the allegations made in the said letter of the company dated May 26, 2015. Thereafter, the petitioner filed the present application for winding up of the company. The company contested the wind ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other. According to the company, even if the said amount of Rs. 10 lakhs was in fact paid by the petitioner, the same was the liability of the Kanoi Group as there was no approval of the Board of the company authorising Sanjay Kanoi to take such alleged loan on behalf of the company from the petitioner. It was also alleged that while negotiations for purchase of the Seller Group's shareholding was in progress, the said group had handed over to the purchasers in or around December, 2014 a document for a period between April, 2014 - 1st December, 2014 which identified amounts in relation to the petitioner under the category of "Advance Against Tea". The company further alleged that since the petitioner does not hold a money lenders' licence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... document from this Court, an inference may be drawn that the said agreement dated May 23, 2014 all along formed and still forms part of the records of the company. It was further submitted that although the company has sought to put up a defence to the petitioner's claim in this application by alleging that the said agreement dated May 23, 2014 is fraudulent and collusive but, it has not filed any legal proceeding, before the competent Court of law, for cancellation of the said agreement. The petitioner stressed that as per Section 13 of the Act of 1940 it is only when the plaintiff in a suit for recovery of money lent and advanced does not hold a money lender's licence, his suit is liable to be stayed and the said provision does not apply ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the examination of the petitioner's witness the company would prove the said agreement dated May 23, 2014 to be collusive and fraudulent and not binding upon it. It was, however, admitted by the company that till today, it has not filed any suit or legal proceedings before any competent Court of law for cancellation of the said agreement dated May 23, 2014. It was lastly contended by the company that when the petitioner does not hold a money lender's licence under the Bengal Money Lenders' Act, 1940 as per Section 13 of the said Act, the present application is not maintainable. Urging all these grounds, Mr. Gupta submitted that the company has raised a bona fide dispute to the claim of the petitioner in this application and the defence pu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authorising its directors to enter into the said agreement dated May 23, 2014 and to receive the said loan amount. Although, the company has claimed that the said agreement dated May 23, 2014 entered into between the petitioner and itself is fraudulent and not binding upon it but, the company has not filed any legal proceeding before any competent court of law to have the said agreement cancelled. The company further alleged that the said "Kanoi Group" made over certain documents to the present management, "Desai Group" identifying certain amounts in relation to the petitioner under the category of "Advanced Against Tea". The company has, however, withheld such documents from this Court. Further, from a bare reading of Section 13 of the Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
