SHARDA REFRIGERATION CO PVT LTD Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) M. C. Jain, J. This is winding up petition made by the petitioner Gupta Gasoline Distributor against the respondent- company-Sharda Refrigeration Company Pvt. Ltd. having its registered office at 48/48a, Baluaghat, Allahabad for its winding up. The petitioner is a creditor of the respondent-company. The petition has been presented with these allegations:

(2.) THE respondent-company was ap pointed the sole distributor of Birla Blue Flames Ltd. SCO 837, Mani Majra, Chan digarh engaged in distribution of Im ported LPG under the parallel marketing of LPG Policy of Government of India, for several Districts of State of U. P. including District Meerut, THE respondent- com pany was assigned by Birla Blue Flames Ltd. to appoint dealers for Meerut District for the smooth running and effective work ing of the business in LPG Cylinders. For this purpose the respondent- company ap pointed the petitioner as its sub-dis tributor for appointment of dealers in Meerut District. An agreement was entered into between the petitioner and the respondent-company on 6-11-1993 on payment of Rs. one lac as security deposit. THE amount was agreed to be refunded at the rate of 24% interest per annum. Be sides, premium of Rs. Three lacs was also charged bearing interest at the same rate. On the assurance of the respondent-com pany, the petitioner appointed dealers in District Meerut but no progress in busi ness was made by the respondent-com pany. THE petitioner surrendered sub- dis tributorship of the respondent-company in the (sic) 1995 vide letter dated 20-6-1995 and asked for the refund of its deposit and expenses incurred as also for damages on account of loss of business. THE amount asked for was Rs. 10,92,500 plus interest at the rate of 24% per annum from the date of deposit. In response to letter of the petitioner the respondent desired a per sonal meeting to settle the claim. THE meeting was held on 18-7-1995 and the settlement was arrived at for payment of Rs. 5,92,500 only plus interest at the rate of 15% from 1-4-1994. This settlement was confirmed by the respondent-company by letter dated 19-7-1995. However, no pay ment was made and only empty assurances were given by the respondent-company in-spite of several letters sent by the petitioner. Statutory notice was sent by the Petitioner to the respondent-company on -2-1996 in reply whereof the respondent-company confirmed the outstanding amount but requested for one month's time to make payment. However, nothing materialised and the petitioner filed this winding up petition.

(3.) I have heard Sri Arjun Singhal, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vishnu Gupta, learned Counsel for the respondent-company.