RAVI KUMAR Vs. OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ravi Kumar, Director of M/s Presidium Breweries Pvt. Ltd. (Company, for short) has filed the present intra Court appeal impugning orders dated 15th May, 2013 and 29th August, 2013 passed in Company Petition No.306/2012 titled Paramvir Singh Vs. Presidium Breweries Pvt. Ltd.

(2.) Order dated 15th May, 2013 records that earlier on 27th February, 2013, the Managing Director of the company had appeared in person and was directed to file an affidavit stating and mentioning movable and immovable assets and enclosing therewith balance sheets, profit and loss accounts and statements of all bank accounts for the last three years. The company was also restrained from creating any charge, alienating, transferring or parting with possession of any of its movable assets. Order dated 15th May, 2013 records that the said direction has not been complied with and no one was present on the said date to contest the proceedings. Accordingly, the company petition was admitted and the Official Liquidator was appointed as Provisional Liquidator with a direction to take over all assets, books of accounts and records. Citations were directed to be published and directors of the company were asked to ensure strict compliance of Section 454 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act, for short) and Rule 130 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959. Statement of affairs in the prescribed form was required to be filed within 21 days.

(3.) On or about 17th June, 2013, the company filed Company Application No.1053/2013 seeking recall of the order dated 15th May, 2013. In this application, the company contested the winding up claim under Section 433(1)(e) of the Act on merits and had also given the reason why no one was present on behalf of the company when the matter was taken up for hearing on 15th May, 2013. It was stated that the Director of the company was to appear before the Court and ask for some time on 15th May, 2013 to comply with the earlier directions. However, on 14th May, 2013, the said Director had gone to Mohali with an intention to come back and make appearance. On his return journey from Mohali to Delhi, his car broke down and he could not reach the Court in time. At about 2.25 p.m. on 15th May, 2013, when he came to the Court after procuring entry pass, he was informed that the matter had been adjourned to 8th October, 2013. He subsequently read the order dated 15th May, 2013 on the internet and came to know about the winding up order. Before summer vacations, the company had filed an application for recall of the order of the winding up dated 15th May, 2013 vide diary number indicated in paragraph 18, but the said application could not be listed due to office objection and pre vacation rush in the Registry.