NAGAVENI BHAT Vs. CANARA LEASING LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS O. S. A. is filed against the order of the learned Company Judge, dated 25-8-2000 passed in Co. P. No. 5 of 1996 whereby the learned single Judge declined to issue a direction for winding up of the company.

(2.) ACCORDING to the learned Counsel for appellants, the respective appellants deposited amounts in the company on various dates between 1989 and 1991 for specified periods. But the amounts so deposited were not repaid on respective maturity dates. The appellants issued notice and claimed interest at 14% per annum on the maturity value. It is alleged that as no reply was received, the company is deemed to have been unable to pay its debt and therefore the appellants filed this petition under Section 433 of the Companies Act for winding up. Pending company petition, the entire amount along with interest was paid. The learned Single Judge on consideration of the case-law has not interfered and observed that the petitioners will be free to sort out their grievance before the Civil Court by filing civil suits in accordance with law.

(3.) THE grievance of the petitioners is that the learned Single Judge has erred in not allowing the petition and directing the winding up of the company on its failure to pay interest on delayed payment when there was no dispute regarding the liability for the payment of the principal amount. The learned Counsel relied on the decision of Madras high Court in Rashi Leathers (Private) Limited v Super Fine Skin Trader , and also the ruling of Delhi High Court in Devendra Kumar Jain v polar Forgings and Tools Limited, and another verdict of Punjab and haryana High Court in Stephen Chemicals (Private) Limited v Innosearch Limited.