A. SREEDHARAN NAIR Vs. UNION HARDWARES (PRIVATE) LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is filed under Section 433(c) and (f) read with Section 439 of the Companies Act, 1956, by one of the shareholders seeking to wind up the company. The main ground alleged is that though the company was established in December, 1984, it stopped business from 1987 onwards. Even during the time when the company did business it is alleged that the company was incurring huge loss. The petitioner was examined as PW -1. The deputy chairman of the company was examined as PW -2. Both of them gave evidence to the effect that the company did not do any business after March, 1987. CW -1 and CW -2 were examined to show that the company had in fact been doing business after 1987 also. However, there is no positive reliable evidence tendered by them to show that the company did any business after March, 1987. Much reliance is sought to be placed by the shareholders who sought to be impleaded in the above petition, but permitted only to assist this court, on exhibit A -2 which is a photostat copy of the cash bill/proforma invoice alleged to have been issued to one Cap. K. K. Kaimal (retired deputy chairman, Union Hardwares (P.) Ltd., PW -2. Cap. K. K. Kaimal, has denied having made any purchase covered by exhibit A -2. No one has given any evidence to show that the company or anybody on behalf of the company did purchase the goods covered by exhibit A -2 as alleged. The mere production of a bill or invoice showing the purchaser's name as that of the company cannot be taken as proof of the fact that the said company actually purchased the goods covered by the said cash bill in so far as such a cash bill could be obtained by any stranger in the name of the company. Therefore, from the evidence in the case it is to be taken that the company did not carry o any business since March, 1987, in the absence of any contra evidence in this regard.

(2.) SECTION 433(c) of the Companies Act is very clear. As per Section 433(c) a company may be wound up by the court if the company does not commence its business within a year from its incorporation or suspends its business for a whole year. In the present case, the company petition was filed in October, 1990, on the allegation that the company has not been doing any business from the year 1987. As such the ground given in Section 433(c) of the Companies Act is clearly established in support of the present petition.

(3.) THE petitioner shall pay an amount of Rs. 3,000 to the official liquidator to cover the initial expenses in the matter within a period of three months from today.