B.S. RAVI Vs. ALDEA ELECTRONICS (P.) LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent is a Private Limited Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956. In the year 2001 Respondent-company was facing acute financial trouble on account of withdrawal of working capital by their Banker - State Bank of Mysore. At that time, Respondent-company approached the Petitioner for funds with an offer to repay the same with interest at 18 per cent p.a. Accordingly, the Petitioner advanced a sum of Rs. 8,64,000 to the Respondent-company. Up to 31-3-2005, the Respondent-company made certain payments. In the month of March 2005 the Respondent-company expressed its difficulty in payment of interest at 18 per cent and requested the Petitioner to reduce the rate of interest. Accordingly, with effect from 1-4-2005 by consent of the parties the rate of interest was reduced from 18 per cent to 15 per cent p.a. Thereafter, the Respondent-company failed to pay the balance of principal and interest. On 18-5-2006 as per Annexure-B, Petitioner issued notice calling upon the Respondent-company to repay the amounts due by them failing which to take appropriate legal action. Thereafter, the Respondent-company made certain payment and requested to adjust the same towards principal and not towards interest. Accordingly, the repayment made by the Respondent-company came to be adjusted towards principal. Even thereafter, the Respondent-company was found due a sum of Rs. 1,00,000 towards principal as on 31-3-2005. Despite repeated requests, demands and statutory notice dated 30-9-2005 as per Annexure-D, the Respondent-company failed to pay the amounts due to the Petitioner. Hence, this petition under Section 433 for winding up of the Respondent-company.

(2.) After service of notice, Respondent-company entered appearance and filed statement of objections inter alia admitting the transaction between the parties. Respondent-company contends that there is a dispute between the parties in the matter of adjustment of payments towards principal and interest and the same is required to be resolved in a competent Civil Court. On this ground the Respondent-company opposed the petition.

(3.) Heard arguments on both the sides and perused the entire petition papers.