M.K.MAHAJAN Vs. INDO ROLLHARD INDUST. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application has been filed by the petitioners under Rule 9 read with Rule 29 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, inter alia, seeking the following prayers:-

(2.) The controversy that arises in the present matter is whether an order under Rule 96 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the "Rules") for advertisement of admission of winding up petition should be directed and whether an order under Rule 106 of the Rules for appointing the Official Liquidator as the Provisional Liquidator should be passed.

(3.) The present Company Petition has been filed by the petitioners alleging that the respondent company is liable to be wound up under Sections 433 (c), (e) & (f) read with Section 434 (1)(a) & (c) of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"). The petitioners are shareholders of the respondent company and petitioner no. 1 is also claiming to be a creditor of the respondent company. By an order dated 16.02.2009, this court admitted the winding up petition and ordered that the respondent company be wound up. The court appointed the Official Liquidator as a Liquidator of the company and directed him to take over all the assets and records of the respondent company. The court also directed that citations be published in the "Statesman" (English) and "Jansatta" (Hindi). The relevant extract of the said order is quoted below:-