Gujarat High Court
Astral vs Kenson on 2 September, 2011
Author: K.M.Thaker
Bench: K.M.Thaker
COMP/124/2011 3/ 3 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD COMPANY PETITION No. 124 of 2011 ========================================================= ASTRAL POLYTECHNIK LTD - Petitioner(s) Versus KENSON MARKETING PVT LTD - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR DK NAKRANI for Petitioner(s) : 1, NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER Date : 06/02/2012 ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr Nakrani for the petitioner. He has submitted that the process issued by the Court has been served on the respondent company, however, the respondent company has not entered appearance. He submitted that the affidavit of service has been filed wherein it is stated that the process of the Court has been served on the respondent company on 26/09/2011. Since the respondent company did not enter appearance, on 16/11/2011, below mentioned order was passed:
"Heard Mr. Nakrani, learned advocate for the petitioner.
Having regard to the factual aspects recorded in the order dated 2.9.2011 and the the submission made by learned advocate for the petitioner to the effect that neither demand/notice was responded to by the respondent-company nor appearance has been entered into in present proceedings and reply affidavit contesting the petition has also not been filed, it appears appropriate, more particularly, in light of the apprehension expressed by the learned advocate for the petitioner that the respondent-company may deal with or dispose of its assets and properties, to pass order restraining the respondent-company from alienating its properties. Therefore, it is directed that until further orders, the respondent-company, either directly or indirectly and/or through its officers or agents or servants, shall not transfer or alienate or encumber, in any manner whatsoever, its assets and properties.
With a view to affording last opportunity to the respondent-company, to enter appearance, if it desires to do so, for opposing the petition, the matter is adjourned to 2.12.2011."
2. It is the case of the petitioner that respondent company is unable to pay its debt. It is claimed by the petitioner company in present petition that:
"7. The petitioner respectfully states and submits that the petitioner company is manufacturing C PVC and PVC Pipes and Fitting and supplying the same to the Respondent Company from long time. It is further submitted that the Respondent Company is usually placing the order of C PVC and PVC Pipes and Fittings from time to time. The Respondent Company has ordered to supply C PVC and PVC Pipes and Fittings and same was delivered by the petitioner company to the Respondent Company, the petitioner has issued the invoices time and again, as per account statement prepared by the petitioner from 01.04.2010 to 20/6/2011, the total amount is arrears from the Respondent Company is Rs.30,64,403/- (Rupees Thirty Lacs Sixty Four Thousand Four Hundred Three Rupees only). The petitioner has prepared the statement of account from 1/4/2010 to 20/6/2011, it shows the Debit amount of Rs.4,95,49,075/- and Credit amount of Rs.4,64,84,672/- and due amount of Rs.30,64,403/-. The statement of account dated 20/6/2011 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-A.
3. Thus, according to the petitioner company, the period for which the amount is due from the respondent company is from 01/04/2010 to 20/06/2011 and the amount which is outstanding as unpaid dues is of Rs.30,645,403/-.
4. It is claimed that the statutory notice dated 05/07/2011 was served at the registered office of the respondent company. The copy of the statutory notice has been placed on record at Annexure-B and the acknowledgment receipt supported submission that the notice has been served on 12/07/2011 is placed on record on page-20.
5. Having regard to the aforesaid factual aspects and the fact that even after the process issued by this Court and its service by the petitioner on the respondent company, the respondent has not filed any reply and has not contested the petition and has not even caused appearance, the Court is satisfied that the petition is required to be admitted. Hence, following order is passed:
Admit.
Before permitting the petitioner to publish advertisement of admission of the petition, the petitioner is directed to serve directly the process of the admission of the petition to the respondent company.
In addition to the permission to directly serve the process, the office is also directed to serve the order admitting the petition to the respondent with intimation that till the next date, if any satisfactory reply is not filed, the Court will proceed to pass appropriate order including the order directing the petitioner to publish advertisement about admission of the petition.
The process shall be made returnable on 16/03/2012.
(K.M.THAKER, J.) (ila)