High CourtsSingle Bench(1998) 01 GUJ CK 0027

Mehta Integrated Finance Ltd. vs Bharat Parenterals Ltd.

Gujarat High Court · Decided on 28 January 1998 · Citation: (1999) 98 CompCas 791

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.D. Pandit, J
CASE NUMBER
Company Petition No. 282 of 1996

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

17 paragraphs · 373 words

S.D. Pandit, J.—Mehta Integrated Finance Ltd., a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, has filed the present petition u/s

433 of the Companies Act, 1956, seeking an order of winding up of Bharat Parenterals Ltd., a company incorporated under the Companies Act,

1956.

2.

It is the claim of the applicant that the applicant was appointed as an underwriter for selling shares of the said company worth Rs. 20 lakhs and

he was to get a commission at 2.5 per cent. It is further claimed that his commission amounting to Rs. 50,000 has not been paid by the said

company though he demanded it from time to time. He, therefore, issued a statutory notice u/s 434 of the Companies Act and called upon the said

company to pay his commission but the same was not paid though the company in question was duly served and hence he has filed the present

petition.

3.

In this petition the respondent was duly served, but the respondent did not appear before this court either personally or through an advocate.

The learned advocate for the petitioner states that, after service of the notice on the respondent, the respondent has paid Rs. 15,000. The

petitioner states that he was ready and willing to accept only the principal amount and it was promised by the respondent that the remaining amount

of Rs. 35,000 would be paid before August, 1997, but the same is not paid. This conduct of the respondent in making part payment as well as in

not replying to the statutory notice shows that the respondent was in debt to the petitioner as claimed by the petitioner in this petition. Though the

respondent is duly served, he has not given reply to show cause as to why the petition should not be admitted. In the circumstances, I hold that the

present petition deserves to be admitted but, in view of the part payment made by the respondent and the readiness and willingness of the

petitioner to accept the principal amount, I issue notice as to admission of this petition and defer issuing of advertisement till February 26, 1998.

The respondent to appear as per the said notice of admission before this court on February 26, 1998.