AERO WINGS Vs. VIF AIRWAYS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner M/s Anand Trading Corpn., filed the petition under section 433(e) read with section 434(1)(a) and 439 of the Companies Act stating that the petitioner company is a partnership company, whereas the respondent company having its corporate office at VIF Enclave, Banjara Hills, which is incorporated as a private limited company on 27.5.1993 with an authorised capital of rupees 10 million and subsequently, on 23.1.1995, the company was converted into a public limited company. The nominal capital of the company is Rs. 17,00,00,000 divided into Rs. 1,70,00,000 shares each of Rs. 10. The capital paid up amount is Rs. 28,78,38,000. It is further stated that the respondent company was to buy, maintain, take on lease, hire purchase, exchange or otherwise deal in all kinds of air crafts; to carry on business in air transportation in India and abroad and to manage the flight of passengers also as consultants of air transportation in India and abroad and to render transportation services; (c) to render technical and professional service to Government and private agencies including firms and individuals in connection with the air travel either as complete services or part thereof including loan of services of various technical and non-technical personnel and imparting technical and organisational know - how ; (d) to arrange for passenger, cargo handling, cargo internal and international booking ; and (e) to arrange for chartered aircrafts to and from places in and outside India and to act as travel agents and forwarding agents.

(2.) It is further submitted that by the petitioner that the respondent had approached the petitioner firm for a loan of Rs. 2,00,000 and the said amount was paid by a bank draft drawn on Bank of India. It was further submitted that the interest of Rs. 1,35,465 from 16.11.1995 to 30.9.1997 was accrued to the account. It is an admitted I Company Petition No. 165 of 1997, decided in Andhra Pradesh High Court by Ramesh Madhav Bapat, J., on 14 Dec., 1998. liability. It was further stated by the petitioners that they addressed letters to the respondent requesting them to return the loan amount with interest accrued thereon. Finally, the petitioner issued a notice on 7 Oct., 1997, under the Companies Act. Inspite of notice, the respondent did not pay the amount. Under these circumstances, the petitioner was constrained to file the present petition for winding up of the respondent company.

(3.) On presentation of the petition, notice was issued to the respondent. Mr. P. Veera Reddy filed vakalath, but he did not file counter. Therefore, the petitioner was directed to file an affidavit in support of the claim. Affidavit is now filed. Since the averments made by the petitioner in the affidavit have not been rebutted as the respondent remained absent, this court directs that the respondent company shall be wound up forthwith. The official liquidator shall take into his custody and control of the properties and assets and the books and papers of the company and shall take all necessary steps for that purposes. The order for winding up shall be drawn up in Form No. 52 with appropriate modifications. Two certified copies there of shall be sent to the official liquidator who shall cause a sealed copy of the order served on the company as required by sub-rule (2) of rule 111. The petitioner is directed to advertise the notice of the winding up order in Form No. 53 in the English daily 'Deccan Chronicle' and Telugu Daily 'Vaartha' published from Hyderabad within 14 days and deposit a sum of Rs. 5,000 for meeting the expenses by the official liquidator.