9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 1185X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filing a suit claiming damages, however, till date no such suit has been filed. Also significant that the company’s cheques amounting to ₹ 92,38,399/- were dishonored upon presentation. The company claims that after the cheques were dishonored a sum of ₹ 1,32,81,250/- was paid by it to the petitioner but it is not clear whether such payment was wholly in respect of the contract for supply of fixture and furniture or whether part of it was in respect of the ID Works contract. In case such deposit is made, the Registrar, Original Side will invest the sum in a fixed deposit in a nationalized bank of his choice. In case, the deposit is not made as directed, the winding up petition shall stand admitted and the petitioner will be a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any had awarded to the petitioner the work of supply and installation of loose and fixed furniture for the guest rooms in the hotel being built by the petitioner at Calcutta under franchise from Taj Gateway Hotels for an initial contractual sum of ₹ 3,40,00,000/- on the terms and conditions contained in the Letter of Intent. In pursuance of the Letter of Intent the petitioner had delivered and installed the required furniture for the hotel rooms and submitted its running invoices on diverse dates for payment. The petitioner raised the final invoice on 29th September, 2012 for a sum of ₹ 3,35,02,389/-. Apart from the aforesaid, at the company s request the petitioner had executed, delivered and installed additional quantities ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le under the contract for supply of furniture. Such stand of the company is not valid and legally tenable. By a letter issued by the company (page 53 of the affidavit-inopposition), the company admitted the dues of the petitioner under the contract for supply of furniture and apologized for the delay in releasing payment and assured that funds would be arranged as soon as possible. The petitioner s admitted dues have not been paid by the company in spite of receipt of statutory notice by the company and as such the company should be wound up. The case of the company: Winding up is a discretionary remedy. The facts of the case and the correspondence between the parties which have been disclosed in the affidavit-inreply were suppressed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had not been made. Despite this position, the petitioner wrongly deposited the post dated cheques worth ₹ 92 lakhs. The company paid ₹ 50 lakhs by RTGS on 14th August, 2012. The company paid a further sum of ₹ 25 lakhs to the petitioner as recorded in the Email dated 8th October, 2012 (page 82 of the affidavit-in-opposition). There cannot be any case on dishonored cheques since after the cheques were dishonored, there have been payment of ₹ 1,32,81,250/- by the company to the petitioner. There are bona fide and substantial disputes between the petitioner and the company and as such the winding up petition should be dismissed. The Court s View: I have considered the rival contentions of the parties. There ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot clear whether such payment was wholly in respect of the contract for supply of fixture and furniture or whether part of it was in respect of the ID Works contract. In view of the aforesaid, this court is of the view that although the winding up petition ought not to be admitted, the company should be put on terms as its defence has raised a doubt regarding its bona fide nature in the mind of the court. In the premises, the company is directed to deposit with the Registrar, Original Side, of this court upon intimation to the petitioner a sum of ₹ 1,02,11,720/- within four weeks from date. If such deposit is made the instant winding up petition shall stand permanently stayed and the petitioner will be at liberty to file a suit for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
