(1.) The petitioner has filed this petition under Sec. 433 and 434 of the Companies Act of 1956 wherein the petitioner has prayed that the respondent-company be ordered to be wound up by and under the direction of this Court and the Official Liquidator attached with this Court be appointed as Liquidator of respondent-company with a direction to take over the charge of the assets and books of accounts and affairs of the respondent-company. It is further prayed that during the pendency of this petition, the Official Liquidator attached with this Court be appointed as Provisional Liquidator for taking inventory of the assets and properties of the respondent. In the meantime, respondent be retrained from alienating, encumbering, transferring, creating third party rights for selling or disposing off its property.
(2.) Heard learned advocate Mr. Navin Pahwa for the petitioner with learned advocate Mrs. Sangeeta Pahwa and learned advocate Mr. B.T. Rao for the respondent.
(3.) On the other hand, learned advocate Mr. B.T. Rao appearing for the respondent mainly submitted that this petition is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed on the ground that there is no privity of contract between the petitioner and respondent-company. In absence of any privity of contract, the petition filed by the third party may not be entertained by this Court. Learned advocate for the respondent has pointed out that the respondent had awarded a contract to a consortium headed by Samsung and the said company namely Samsung in turn entered into the sub-contract with the petitioner. Thus, the respondent has not entered into any agreement or assigned any contract for carrying out the work at Wadinar Port of the respondent-company. The petitioner has failed to produce any document on record that the respondent has entered into any contract with the petitioner for undertaking any work and, therefore, in absence of any agreement, the present petition filed by the third party is not maintainable.