MISHRIMAL ANANDKUMAR Vs. POLYCOT CABLES PVT. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS group of appeals raise common questions and have been argued together. The appellants have challenged the order dated February 18, 1998, made by the learned company judge in Company Petitions Nos. 306 to 309 of 1997, by which all the company petitions were rejected. According to the appellants the respondent -company had, despite statutory notice dated July 10, 1997, given by the appellants, not paid their dues and was therefore, liable to be wound up under section 433 read with section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956.

(2.) THE appellants' case was that the respondent -company was incorporated on September 27, 1988, for the business of manufacturing of cables and other items. The appellants had advanced the disputed amounts to the company on which interest was to be paid. The company paid interest till March 31, 1990. However, thereafter it did not pay interest, nor did it return the amounts which were outstanding as loan as per the balance -sheet of the company. The appellants, therefore, issued the statutory notice contemplated by section 434(1)(a) of the said Act, requiring the company to pay the dues of the appellants. According to the appellants, the company failed and neglected to pay the dues and thereby became liable for being wound up because it was deemed to be unable to pay its debts.

(3.) IN the rejoinder, the appellants took up a contention that the alleged document by which the arrangement for adjusting the dues was reached, was not signed by the outgoing director Parasmal P. Bagrecha and that even if he had so signed, that was not binding on the appellants. Moreover, the amounts were shown by way of unsecured loan to the company in the balance -sheet as on March 31, 1995, a copy of which was annexed at annexure D to the affidavit -in -rejoinder. According to the appellants, there was no triable issue, nor any bona fide dispute in the matter and the company was liable to be wound up.