Calcutta High Court
Amazan Agro Products Ltd vs Roshan Publicity on 9 January, 2014
Author: Patherya
Bench: Patherya
ORDER SHEET
CP No.242 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Original Jurisdiction
IN THE MATTER OF:-
AMAZAN AGRO PRODUCTS LTD.
AND
ROSHAN PUBLICITY
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA
Date : 9th January, 2014.
Mr.Anirban Ghosh, Advocate, Ms.Paushali Banerjee, Advocate.
..for the petitioner.
The Court : None appears on behalf of the company in spite of service. Affidavit of service filed be kept on record.
This application has been filed under Section 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 for a claim arising out of media work undertaken by the petitioning creditor on behalf of the company in relation to publicity hoardings. Invoices were raised on the company as far back as in April 2010. But no payment has been made in spite thereof. Accordingly, under Section 434 of the 1956 Act a notice was issued and the said notice has been received by the company. Delivery attempted on the recorded director in the records of the RoC could not be effected as the addressee was absent though intimation was served. No reply has been given by the company in spite of receipt of the statutory notice, therefore, the presumption of the company's inability to make payment 2 remains unrebutted. This entitles the petitioning creditor to an order on this application. Accordingly, the company petition is admitted and the company is directed to make payment of a sum of Rs.8,19,342/- to the petitioning creditor along with interest calculated at 9 % per annum on and from the date of issuance of statutory notice till the date of payment by 30th January, 2014. This order is passed as the company has utilised the services of the petitioning creditor without demur and has raised no dispute in spite of the bill raised but has accepted the same.
In default, the petitioning creditor will be at liberty to publish advertisement once in "Bartaman" and once in "The Times of India"
Kolkata edition.
Matter is made returnable four weeks hence. In spite of receipt of order dated 7th May, 2013 no affidavit in opposition has been filed by the company.
All parties concerned are to act on a signed photocopy of this order on the usual undertakings.
( PATHERYA, J.) nm A.R.(C.R.)