Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Schindler India Pvt Ltd vs Arn Infrastructure India Ltd on 27 April, 2022

Author: Vibhu Bakhru

Bench: Vibhu Bakhru

                          $~24(2022)
                          *     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +     O.M.P. (COMM) 17/2018
                                SCHINDLER INDIA PVT LTD.                           ..... Petitioner
                                                   Through: Mr Sonal Jain, Mr Ishkaran Singh,
                                                   Ms Kajal Sharma, Advocates.

                                                   versus

                                ARN INFRASTRUCTURE INDIA LTD.                      ..... Respondent
                                                   Through: Mr Tathagat Mewara, Advocate.

                                CORAM:
                                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
                                                   ORDER

% 27.04.2022

1. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent states that the respondent company does not exist anymore as its name has been struck off from the Register of Companies.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner refers to an order dated 26.09.2019 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal in Appeal No. 1021/252/ND/2018, whereby the respondent's application for seeking restoration of its name on the Register of Companies was allowed subject to payment of costs and filing the outstanding documents, which the respondent had failed to do. Further, the order freezing the bank accounts of the respondent was vacated.

3. He states that although the respondent company has now revived and operating its bank accounts, the respondent is refraining from filing any Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:Dushyant Rawal Signing Date:29.04.2022 documents and therefore, taking advantage of continuing its activities and yet not existing on the Register of Companies.

4. Clearly, if the respondent is not existing, there is no question of the respondent operating any bank account.

5. At the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, list on 02.08.2022.

6. The petitioner is also at liberty to communicate a copy of this order to the concerned banks.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J APRIL 27, 2022 pkv Click here to check corrigendum, if any Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:Dushyant Rawal Signing Date:29.04.2022