RUSHABH PRECISION BEARINGS Vs. DEPUTY ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned Advocate Mr.Dipak R.Dave waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondents.

(2.) This petition is filed seeking direction to the respondent-Electricity Company to restart /restore the electricity connection to the petitioner having consumer No.17428HT.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that due to labour problems at the relevant time, the factory was shutdown and proceedings under the BIFR were instituted. At the relevant time, dues of the respondent-Electric Company were to the tune of Rs.4,64,343.37/-. Despite the order of BIFR under Section 25 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1975, the respondent filed Civil Suit, wherein ex parte decree was passed along with interest at the rate of 12%. Pursuant to the decree, Execution Petition was filed claiming an amount of Rs.12,41,034.96/-. In the meantime, Company Petition No.18 of 1998 for winding up was filed before the Bombay High Court against the petitioner. The petition came to be allowed and the company was ordered to be wound up by order dated 30.03.2010. The Managing Director through his personal funds and funds arranged from the family and friends filed Company Application No.569 of 2017 for recalling the winding up order dated 30.03.2010. In view of these proceedings, claims were invited by public advertisement. The respondent-Electric Company, though a creditor, did not appear before the Bombay High Court. The petitioner also addressed communication informing about the petition so that the respondent-Electric Company can represent its case before the Company Court. Still, no appearance was filed. Ultimately, the application of the petitioner was allowed vide order dated 05.02.2018 and the order of winding up was recalled, as a result, the company was revived. In compliance with the order of revival, the petitioner sent Demand Draft of Rs.4,64,343/- in favour of the respondent, but the same was not accepted.