JYOTI LIMITED Vs. INTERNATIONAL PUMPS AND PROJECTS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) M/s Jyoti Limited filed a petition under Section 433(e), 4343 and 4339 of the Indian Companies Act,1956 (in short the Act) seeking winding up order against M/s International Pumps and Projects Ltd., inter alia, on the ground that the respondent is indebted and has not paid the debt due to the petitioner.

(2.) That facts as alleged in the petition are that the respondent placed a purchase order on the petitioner pertaining to the specified Switch Board vide letter dated 10/7/1995. The transaction emanated from agreement for the Kharagpur Augmentation Water Supply Scheme belonging to Public Health Engineering Department, Government of West Bengal Undertaking at Keshpal Augmentation Water Supply Scheme Pumping Station, Midnapore, West Bengal. The petitioner had also asked for Mobilisation Advance of 10% but no reply was given by the respondent. According to the petitioner, respondent's order was kept in abeyance for want of required clarification regarding terms of payment. Request of the respondent to make payment by post dated cheque was declined by the petitioner. Petitioner was surprised when the respondent informed to defer the manufacturing of panel. The goods manufactured by the petitioner were inspected by the Inspecting Team of the respondent and the goods were found in order. The material was despatched on 15/6/1997. Thereafter revised sight draft incorporating invoice/G.C. number was sent to the respondent for his acceptance and co-acceptance of his bank. But the sight draft was not accepted by the respondents bankers. Documents were, therefore, discounted by the bankers of the petitioner. Respondent did not release payment inspite of reminders. That the respondent had no intention to pay for the switch gears. Thus, the amount due from the respondent as claimed by the petitioner works out to Rs.49,08,800.00 towards price of the switch gears. Respondent by letter dated 9/1/1998 admitted its liability. Petitioner filed a writ petition in Calcutta High Court. The same was dismissed being between private parties. Legal notice demanding payment of the debt due was served but inspite of that no payment made, hence the petition.

(3.) On the basis of the averments made in this petition, notice was issued to the respondent. In the meantime, respondent was restrained from transferring, alienating, encumbering or parting with possession of the assets of the respondent company.