9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1798X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1 ORAL ORDER 1.0. Heard Ms. Prachiti Shah, learned advocate for Ms. Anuja S Nanavati, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr.Darshan Gandhi, learned advocate for Mr. S P Majmudar, learned advocate for the respondent. By this petition under Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, the petitioner has prayed for winding up of the respondent company named Polo Ceramics Private Limited. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondent company, as can be seen from the postal endorsement at page nos. 43 and 44 of the paper book. No reply was filed to the statutory notice and even in reply to the petition after notice was served, as rightly pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner is moonshine defence even the technical defence that the statutory notice was not served, is far from truth and contrary to the rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondent company is not in operation. Even the additional affidavit filed by the petitioner before this Court clearly mentioned that respondent company incurred loss in the year 2012, 2013 and 2014. Considering the date of invoice and the date of filing of this petition and even on the ground of limitation, prima facie present petition is within the time. 2.0. In light of the aforesaid facts, pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
