AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Aravind Kumar
Heard learned counsel appearing for applicant.
None appears on behalf of respondent.
Though sufficient time has been granted, it is seen from the record that learned counsel for respondent has consistently remained absent. In view of the same, application is taken up for consideration. Company Petition 176/2009 was filed by applicant herein against respondent on account of non payment of admitted debt and on failure to comply with the demand made in the statutory notice which was issued prior to filing of this petition. Respondent was served with the notice of this petition. During the tendency of this petition, one of the directors of respondent company appeared before this court and filed an affidavit on 04.12.2009 stating that amounts claimed by petitioner would be paid by 10 cheques of Rs. 1,22,400/- (more specifically enumerated in the affidavit of even date at paragraph 2) it was also agreed that said cheques would be honoured on due dates. Placing said affidavit, on record and as also the submission made at bar, this court by order dated 04.12.2009 disposed of the petition. Liberty was also given to the petitioner/applicant to move this court for reopening of company petition in the event of any of the cheques being dishonoured.
It is stated in the present application that cheques issued by respondent (as per Annexure-A, B to the present application) came to be dishonoured and as such they are seeking revival of company petition COP. 176/2009, It is seen from the order sheet that during the pendency of the present application a demand draft for a sum of Rs. 2,44,800/- has been furnished to petitioner and same is not disputed. Thereafter none have appeared on behalf of respondent. There is no resistance to the application in question. From the records it is seen that respondent had agreed to pay the admitted debt as per the affidavit of undertaking dated 04.12.2009 and had issued the cheques in question. Said cheques having been dishonoured for want of funds and respondent having partially paid the amounts covered under these cheques has not paid the remaining balance amount as undertaken before this court in the affidavit filed. In view of the uncontroverted facts and also in view of the fact, this court by order dated 04.12.2009 had reserved liberty to petitioner to revive the petition in question. I am of the view that prayer sought for by applicant deserves to be granted. Accordingly following order is passed:
ORDER
(1) CA.NO. 741/2010 is allowed.
(2) COP 176/2009 is revived and reopened.
(3) Registry is directed to list CO.P. 176/2009 after two weeks for further orders.