9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 1246X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n part of the Official Liquidator to pursue the same in accordance with law and keeping it pending for more than 15 years on one pretext or another and permitting the respondent to take advantage of delay tactics to see that entire cause of action is frustrated, this Court has no other option but to dispose of this matter because keeping such stale matters pending in the Court would not result into any fruitful action on part of the Official Liquidator. Application disposed off. - R/COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 457 of 2007 - - - Dated:- 2-12-2022 - HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA MS PJ DAVAWALA(240) FOR THE APPLICANT(S) NO. 1 (MRS MAUNA M BHATT)(174) FOR THE RESPONDENT(S) NO. 1 MR NIKUNT K RAVAL(5558) FOR THE RESPONDENT(S) NO. 2 MR NK MAJMUDAR(430) FOR THE RESPONDENT(S) NO. 1 ORDER 1.Heard learned advocate Ms. P.J. Davawala for the applicant and learned advocate Mr. Karan Sanghani for learned advocate Mr. Nikunt Raval for respondent no.2. 2.The Official Liquidator has filed this application with the following prayers : (A) Declare that the respondents-accused who were Directors of M/s Esskay Pharmaceutical Ltd has misapplied, ret ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e respondent to remain present before the Court on every hearing. 8.On 21.11.2008, following order was passed by this Court: 1. This matter is listed 27 times. Still it is at a stage whereby the documents have to be collected from the Office of the Official Liquidator. It appears that under one pretext or the another, time is sought for and the necessary compliance of the Order has yet not been made. The Official Liquidator is directed to provide zerox copies of the documents which are demanded by the Respondent within one week from today. 2. Matter is adjourned to December 2, 2008. The respondent is directed to remain personally present before this Court on that day. 9.Thereafter the affidavit was filed on behalf of the respondent and time was sought for filing rejoinder on behalf of the Official Liquidator and the matter was adjourned from time to time. 10. This Court passed the following order on 17.02.2010 : Mr.Suthar, learned Advocate appearing for Mr.N.K.Majmudar on behalf of respondent is hereby directed to ensure that the respondent shall tender on affidavit a list of all personal and family assets (family comprised of self, spouse and minor chil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o have committed misfeasance in relation to the affairs and funds of the company in liquidation viz., M/s. Esskay Pharmaceuticals Limited. The focus of the inquiry shall be as to the mode and manner of siphoning of the funds of the company in liquidation and whether the respondent, Shri Kirti Jain residing at A-1, Samparpan Society, Vasna Road, Vadodara is in a position to refund the amounts misappropriated. The Commissioner is requested to furnish the report within a period of four weeks from today i.e. on or before 26/03/2010 in a sealed cover. The Official Liquidator is directed to ensure that all necessary details, as are available on record of this proceeding and the record available with the Official Liquidator are made available to the Income Tax Department for complying with the directions made by this Court. The Official Liquidator shall coordinate with the Income Tax Department to ensure compliance both in letter and spirit. Matter to be listed on 02/03/2010. 12. Thereafter the matter was adjourned from time to time and as the respondent was not remaining present even cost was imposed by the Court. 13. A statement was made before the Court on 7.05.2010 that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t dated 15.09.2011 pursuant to the aforesaid order dated 20.07.2011 seeking permission to avail the services of Mr. P.J.Dholakia, retired Judge of District Court to conduct the matter and further to place the proceedings of the matter on record of this Court and to pay the remuneration of Rs. 10,000/- excluding other actual expenses to Mr. Dholakia. However thereafter it appears that the Official Liquidator has not pressed for passing any order on the aforesaid report and the matter was adjourned from time to time on one pretext or another and mostly due to lack of personal presence of the respondent. On 2.09.2013, the Court passed the following order : When the petition is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the respondent is not present. Therefore Directors of the Company are directed to remain personally present on the next date of hearing. Official Liquidator will supply address of Ex-Directors of the Company to the registry on or before 4.9.2013. After the address is supplied, let notice be issued to the Directors of the Company intimating them to remain personally present on the next date of hearing. S.O. to 30.9.2013. 17. As the Official Liquidator did not c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed making it returnable on 25.10.2013. 5. For the aforesaid purpose, leave to amend is granted. 6. So far as Mr.Jain is concerned, he shall supply his correct, complete and present addresses to learned advocate Mr.Majmudar as well as to learned advocate Mr. Yajnik for the Official Liquidator and he shall also file an undertaking on affidavit to remain present when instructed by learned advocate Mr.Majmudar, under instruction of this Court. On the said condition, presence of Mr.Jainh, Ex-Director is dispensed with so far as next hearing concerned. Affidavit, as aforesaid shall be filed by Mr.Jain today on or before 05.00 p.m. S.0. to 24.10.2013. 18. It appears that thereafter the matter was never heard by the Court till 16.01.2015 and the matter was adjourned at the request of learned advocate Mr. Majmudar from time to time upto 10.03.2022 when the following order was passed: Heard learned advocate Ms. K.J. Brahmbhatt for the applicant and learned advocate Mr. Bhuvnesh Gahlot for learned advocate Mr. N.K. Majmudar for respondent no.1. Learned advocate Mr. Ghalot submitted that name of learned advocate Mr. N.K. Majmudar for respondent no.1 is not shown in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ific research and development u/s 35(1)(iv) amounting to Rs.56,38,059 and excess claim of depreciation to the extent of Rs.2,40,754, which were found to be untenable and admitted by the accountable persons as claimed and knowing fully well that these were bogus. (ii) willfully delivered statements returns of income which were fictitious and untrue and made willfully untrue verification in the return of income with a motive to conceal the income and defraud the revenue. 5. Pursuant to sanction granted for launching prosecution, a criminal complaint no.155 of 2011 came to be filed by the Income Tax Department before the court of Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara against the assessee company and Kirti Jain, the same is pending. 6. I further submit that as per ITD System, the outstanding demand of assessee company for A.Y 2014-15 is Rs. 1340 and Rs. 679 for A.Y 2015- 16. 21. Considering the above progress of the matter since 2007 till date, it appears that the Official Liquidator is not keen to proceed with the matter and the matter is being adjourned from time to time on one pretext or another. The Income Tax department has already instituted the prosecut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
