Bombay High Court
CP/198/2003 of KHETAN BROTHERS Vs CHEMSTAR ORGANIES (I) LTD on 25 August 2003
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. COMPANY PETITION NO.198 OF
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYO. O. C. J.
COMPANY PETITION NO.198 OF 2003WITH COMPANY APPLICATION NOS.397, 398 689/04 & 475/05
M/s.Khetan Brothers. Vs.Chemstar Organics (I) Ltd.
...Petitioner.
...Respondent.
....
Mr. Girish Kedia i/b. Divya Sanghavi for Petitioner.Ms.Seema Sharma for the Applicant in CA 475/05. .....
CORAM :DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.
April 20, 2007.
P.C.:
When the Company Applications came up on Board on 29[th] March 2007, the Court was informed by the Learned Counselfor the parties that instead of taking up the Company Applications,it would be appropriate if the main petition for winding up is listedfor hearing and final disposal. An affidavit in reply has beentendered in which, at Exh.12 is a letter dated 12[th] April 2007addressed by the Company to the BIFR seeking registration of thereference under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions)Act, 1985. It is rather unfortunate that the Court was not informedon the previous date when an adjournment was taken for arguingthe petition on merits that the Company intended to move the BIFR. Though as a matter of fact the reference has not beenregistered, since the attention of the Court has now been drawn tothe fact that the Company has lodged an application dated 12[th]April 2007 with the BIFR, it would be only appropriate and proper iffurther hearing is adjourned to 13[th] June 2007 so as to enable theCourt to be apprised of the steps which have been pursued beforethe BIFR in the meantime. In so far as the affidavit in reply isconcerned, having regard to facts and circumstances of the case,the Respondent is permitted to place the reply on the record.However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, it shall besubject to the payment of costs quantified at Rs.15,000/- to thePetitioner. Costs to be paid within a period of one week fromtoday.
On or before 8[th] June 2007, the Company shall file anaffidavit clarifying the exact status of the proceedings before theBIFR.
....