9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1858X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment stage. The company Judge cannot be faulted for such perception, since creditors of a company have a say at the post-advertisement stage and the company Judge has the discretion to not wind up the company despite its proven indebtedness to the petitioning-creditor if other creditors demonstrate that the company should not be wound up. On the point of principle, the order impugned cannot be questioned. In the meantime, the appellant herein preferred the present appeal. The date July 9, 2018 indicated in the order impugned by the company Court for fresh directions to be issued as to the advertisements could not adhered to, primarily, on account of the pendency of this appeal. The order impugned does not call for any interference. Si ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ompany and instituted winding-up proceedings in such status. The petition was admitted by an order dated August 17, 2015. In terms of such order of admission, the petition was advertised on or about September 14, 2015, but, according to principal respondent State Bank of India, the company petition did not appear in the list on the returnable date as indicated in the advertisements. Sometime in the year 2015, the company made a reference to the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction under the provisions of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985. Such fact was brought to the notice of the company Court and, by an order dated October 13, 2015, the creditor s winding-up petition was adjourned till March, 201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stage, the company Court ought to have issued some form of notice or advertisement before hearing the matter again. At any rate, the State Bank contended before the company Court, the company could not be wound up without reference to its other creditors merely because an advertisement may have been published some two or three years prior to the company being wound-up. In short, it was the allegation of the State Bank that a friendly creditor had been propped up to ensure the winding-up of the company by Court. By the order impugned, the company Court perceived that in the peculiar circumstances that the petition did not appear on the returnable date indicated in the advertisements and the matter remained adjourned for a substantial peri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
