INTEGRA Vs. VEDAVAAG SYSTEMS LIMITED.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS company petition is filed for an order to wind up the respondent for non -payment of debt due to the petitioner.

(2.) THE petitioner pleaded that it is engaged in the business of sales and supply of computers and their peripherals and that the respondent, a Pubic Limited Company, which was earlier known as M/s. SARK Systems India Limited, was its customer since the year 2006 and used to purchase computers and their peripherals on credit basis. That M/s. SARK Systems India Limited assured the petitioner of prompt payment and that it induced and lured the petitioner to supply computers and their peripherals to it on credit basis under a running account. That the petitioner used to supply material under invoice, which was acknowledged by M/s. SARK Systems India Limited upon receiving the goods and that several cheques were issued by the said company, which were dishonoured for want of sufficient funds. The petitioner has referred to as many as 15 cheques for a total sum of Rs. 1,30,70,000/ -, which were allegedly dishonoured for want of sufficient funds in the account of the respondent, and pleaded that whenever the same was intimated to SARK Systems India Limited, it used to request the petitioner not to initiate any proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the N.I. Act') with a promise to pay the due amounts. That M/s. SARK Systems India Limited, vide its letter dated 29.12.2009, admitted its liability to an extent of Rs. 1.5 crores and orally promised the petitioner to pay the said amount within a short time. That Mr. J.S.R. Durga Prasad, who was the Chairman of M/s. SARK Systems India Limited, has also addressed letter dated 30.12.2009 to the proprietor of the petitioner, wherein he has personally agreed to pay an additional sum of Rs. 1.50 crores as compensation for delayed payments. That in July 2011, there was meeting between the petitioner and M/s. SARK Systems India Limited and its chairman Mr. J.S.R. Durga Prasad, in which the respondent agreed to pay the outstanding amount with interest at the rate of 21% and also issued a cheque dated 20.07.2011 for Rs. 2,18,64,235/ -, which includes interest also, and that the said cheque was dishonoured by the bank with the endorsement "account closed". That on enquiries, the petitioner came to know that the name of M/s. SARK Systems India Limited is changed as M/s. VEDAVAAG Systems Limited and that its registered office is also changed to the address given in the cause title of the petition. That after service of notice dated 07.12.2011, under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, to which no reply was received from the respondent, the petitioner has filed C.C. No. 17 of 2012 in the Court of the XI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad, against the respondent, under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, for dishonouring the cheque and that it has also got statutory notice dated 04.12.2011 issued to the respondent and also M/s. SARK Systems India Limited, demanding payment of Rs. 2,35,72,083/ - with interest at the rate of 21% per annum from 01.12.2011 till the date of payment within three weeks from the date of receipt of notice and that failing which action will be taken up for winding up of the respondent. That the respondent has received the said notice, but failed to reply or pay the amount. Therefore, the petitioner has filed this petition.

(3.) THE respondent has also filed additional counter -affidavit, wherein it has pleaded that as per the statement enclosed to the additional counter -affidavit, the petitioner is liable to pay Rs. 25.60 lakhs for supplies under the running account apart from an unsecured advance of Rs. 2.00 crores. As regards letters dated 29.12.2009 and 30.12.2009, wherein the debt was purportedly admitted, it is averred that the proprietor of the petitioner was sending SMSs from his mobile to the Director of the respondent Mr. J.S.R. Durga Prasad threatening him with involvement of media and also his going on fast unto death, that he has even threatened to commit suicide in front of the office of the respondent and that under coercion and threat, letter dated 29.12.2009 of the Managing Director on the company letterhead and letter dated 30.12.2009 by the Managing Director in his personal capacity were issued at midnight between 12.00 a.m. and 1.00 a.m. on the intervening night of 29/30 -12 -2009. The additional counter -affidavit also relied upon the tax audit undertaken by the State Government of A.P. and pleaded that nowhere in the said tax audit, invoice dated 12.07.2008 for Rs. 2.47 crores and invoice dated 14.08.2008 for Rs. 1.36 crores were reflected.