Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.34 seconds)

Shantilal Khushaldas And Bros. Pvt. ... vs Smt. Jayabala Suresh Shah And Another. on 17 December, 1993

18. Two judgements were relied upon by the learned counsel Mr. Panesar; one is the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Shantilal Khushaldas and Bros. Pvt. Ltd Vs. Smt. Jaybala Suresh Shah & Anr. reported at 90(1997) Company Cases 399 which is not applicable at all to the COMP/303/2008 20/23 ORDER facts of the present case. As observed earlier, in the present case, there is express deeming fiction by way of admission on the part of the respondent Company to be unable to pay the outstanding debt upon the failure to pay the installments as agreed as per the consent terms with a further clause of allowing revival of the Company Petition for winding up. Such were not the fact situation in the aforesaid case upon which the reliance is placed by Mr. Panesar and therefore, the same is of no help to the respondent Company.
Bombay High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

Asian Bearing Co. vs Vasant Engineering (P) Ltd. on 28 January, 1998

19.The another decision relied upon by Mr.Panesar is in the case of Asian Bearing C. Vs. Vansant Engineering Pvt. Ltd. reported at 104 (2001) Company Cases 262, wherein based on the consent terms, the Company Petition was withdrawn and therefore, the view was taken by the Court that it will not be a contempt of Court. Such is not the fact situation in the present case. In the present case, after the consent terms were filed, the petitions or the OJ Appeals are not withdrawn, but based on the consent terms, the OJ Appeals as well as the Company Petitions are disposed of in terms of the consent terms. Therefore, when the consent terms are made as a part of the order of this Court, the said decision, which relates to the withdrawal of the petition would not be of any help to the respondent Company.
Gujarat High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 1 - S D Pandit - Full Document
1