Karnataka High Court
M/S Mint Properties vs M/S The Nilgiri Dairy Farm Pvt Ltd on 10 November, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:40657
COP No. 119 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
COMPANY PETITION NO. 119 OF 2014
BETWEEN:
1. M/S MINT PROPERTIES
NO.238,3RD MAIN,
3RD CROSS,CHAMARAJPET,
BANGALORE-560 018
REP BY ITS PARTNER,
SRI DINESH KUMAR M
S/O SIR MADAN LAL
Digitally signed by
BHARATHI S AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
Location: HIGH R/AT NO.238,3RD MAIN,
COURT OF 3RD CROSS,CHAMARAJPET,
KARNATAKA BANGALORE-560 018
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI V B SHIVA KUMAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. M/S THE NILGIRI DAIRY FARM PVT LTD
REGISTERED OFFICE AT
MFAR,SILVERLINE TECH PARK,
NO.180,1ST FLOOR,EPIP PHASE II,
WHITEFIELD,
BANGALORE-560 066
ALSO AT:
M/S. THE NILGIRI DAIRY FARM PVT LTD.,
BUSINESS CONCERN
AT NO.203 AND 205
GREEN GLEM LAYOUT
OFF. SARJAPUR, MARATHAHALLI
OUTER RING ROAD, BELLANDUR
VARTHUR HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI VENUGOPAL, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:40657
COP No. 119 of 2014
THIS COMPANY PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439(1)(B)
R/W SECTION 433 (E) & (F) OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956,
PRAYING THAT THE NILGIRIS DAIRY FARM PRIVATE LIMITED BE
WOUND UP UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANY'S ACT,1956,
AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
None appears for the petitioner.
2. Counsel for the respondent is present.
3. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Action Ispat Pvt. Ltd., v. Shyam Metalics and Energy Ltd.,1 has held as under:
"25. Given the aforesaid scheme of winding up under Chapter XX of the Companies Act, 2013, it is clear that several stages are contemplated, with the Tribunal retaining the power to control the proceedings in a winding-up petition even after it is admitted. Thus, in a winding-up proceeding where the petition has not been served in terms of Rule 26 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 at a pre-admission stage, given the beneficial result of the application of the Code, such winding-up proceeding is compulsorily transferable to NCLT to be resolved under the Code. Even post issue of notice and pre-admission, the same result would ensue. However, post admission of a winding-up petition and after the assets of the company sought to be wound up become in custodia legis and are taken over by the Company Liquidator, Section 290 of the Companies Act, 2013 would indicate that the Company Liquidator may carry on the business of the company, so far as may be necessary, for the beneficial winding up of the company, and may even sell the company as a going concern. So long as no actual 1 2021(2) SCC 641 -3- NC: 2023:KHC:40657 COP No. 119 of 2014 sales of the immovable or movable properties have taken place, nothing irreversible is done which would warrant a Company Court staying its hands on a transfer application made to it by a creditor or any party to the proceedings. It is only where the winding-up proceedings have reached a stage where it would be irreversible, making it impossible to set the clock back that the Company Court must proceed with the winding up, instead of transferring the proceedings to NCLT to now be decided in accordance with the provisions of the Code. Whether this stage is reached would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case."
(emphasis supplied)
4. In view of the clear enunciation of law by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, as noticed above, the present company petition shall stand transferred to the National Company Law Tribunal, Bangalore Bench.
5. Accordingly, company petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE nd List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15