INDORAMA SYNTHETICS (I) LIMITED Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Reference made before us so as to resolve a conflict between two views recorded in two Single Judges' Judgments of this High Court. The question framed for Reference is as follows :-

(2.) The facts giving rise for making of this Reference can be stated, in brief, as follows :-

(3.) At this stage, Respondent No.3 filed an application under Section 446(1) of the Companies Act, 1956, (for short "the Act"), inter alia, praying for a direction to the Petitioner to secure leave from the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, as Respondent No.2-Company was ordered to be wound-up by the said High Court in Company Petition Nos.115 of 2001, 157 of 1997 and 245 of 1997. It was submitted that, in view of Section 446(1) of the Act, the complaint cannot be proceeded with till such time the Petitioner secures leave from the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court to proceed with the complaint. This application came to be resisted by Respondent Nos.2 and 3 on the ground that the Petitioner-Company is ordered to be wound-up after recording plea of Respondent Nos.2 and 3-Accused and hence the application is not maintainable. Both the parties were heard on this application and then relying on the unreported Judgment of this High Court in the case of Suresh K. Jasani Vs. Mrinal Dyeing and Manufacturing Company Limited & Ors. in Criminal Revision Application No.245 of 1997 [Coram : J.H. Bhatia, J.], learned Magistrate was pleased to hold that, in view of the provisions of Section 446(1) of the Act, the matter could not be proceeded with any more, after the winding-up order. Accordingly, the application preferred by Respondent Nos.2 and 3 was allowed and the Petitioner was directed to secure leave from the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, which had passed the winding-up order of Respondent No.2-Company, to continue with this proceeding under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.