LAWS(MPH)-2003-3-25

RAYMOND LIMITED Vs. STEEL TUBES OF INDIA LIMITED

Decided On March 11, 2003
RAYMOND LIMITED Appellant
V/S
Steel Tubes Of India Limited Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE decision rendered in this company petition shall also govern the disposal of other connected company petitions being Company Petition Nos. 13 of 2000, 21 of 2000, 14 and 30 of 2001 and 15 of 2002, because all these company petitions are filed by the creditors (secured/unsecured) of the respondent -Company under Section 433(e) of the Companies Act involving common question.

(2.) THIS is a company petition filed by the petitioner under Section 433(e) of the Companies Act seeking winding -up of the respondent Company - -a limited company engaged inter alia in the business of manufacture of tubes. A winding -up is sought essentially on the ground of inability to pay admitted debt amounting to Rs. 3,58,76,265.67 paise. It is the case of petitioner that they supplied in course of their business dealing goods worth Rs. 2,42,87,876.67 paise to respondent on various dates against the orders placed by the respondent company and accordingly invoices were raised on 25.02.1998 to 16.04.1998 by the petitioner on the respondent, it is contended that despite receipt of the goods, and admitting the liability, the respondents did not pay the money arid hence, need to file a company petition arose after serving statutory notice under Section 434 of the Act. As observed supra, there are other company petitions filed by the creditors both secured as well as unsecured against this very respondent Company seeking winding -up of the company on the same ground that inability to pay their admitted debt as contemplated under Section 433(e) of the Act. The details of the debts claimed and doe against the respondent -Company so far as these cases are concerned are as follows:

(3.) ON behalf of the respondent -Company a shelter of Section 22 of SICA is taken. According to respondent, since the reference under Section 15 of SICA is pending before the BIFR being reference case No. 303 of 2003 and hence, the proceedings be either stayed or deferred in these matters.