J G FINANCE LIMITED Vs. HANSAFLON PLASTOCHEM LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Finance Limited has filed this petition under section 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 , read with rule 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, praying that Hansaflon Plastochem Limited be ordered to be wound up as this company is unable to pay its admitted debts.

(2.) Before deciding the merits of the respective contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties, it would be appropriate to refer to the necessary facts giving rise to the present petition. The petitioner company, which is incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 , with its registered office at 307, Ajit Sen Bhawan, 13, Crooked Lane, Calcutta is primarily involved in the business of financing. Of course, under the objects of the company, the company also deals in the products other than merely financing. On March 8, 1995, the petitioner-company made an intercorporate deposit of Rs. 50,00,000 with the respondent-company for one month bearing interest at the rate of 24 per cent. per annum. The amount was deposited by means of cheque No. 932775, dated March 8, 1995 drawn on Punjab National Bank, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. As the respondent-company failed to fulfil its obligation of the re-payment of the intercorporate deposit on the expiry of one month, a demand was raised by the petitioner-company. The respondent-company made some payments to the petitioner-company of the amount, on the dates indicated hereunder :

(3.) A sum of Rs. 4,53,000 remained as balance on account of principal accounts payable by the respondent-company to the petitioner-company. As on March 31, 1997, the liability of the respondent-company on account of the interest on the intercorporate deposit was stated to be Rs. 8,74,314.51. The details thereof have been provided in paragraph 12 of the petition. In addition to the above figure, the petitioner-company claims a sum of Rs. 13,27,314.51 with interest at the rate of 24 per cent. per annum in accordance with the terms and conditions of the agreement. The respondent-company failed to repay the said amount, therefore, the petitioner-company issued a notice dated May 17, 1997, demanding the said sum of money. Copy of this notice is annexed with the petition as annexure P-2. The notice was received by the respondent-company. However, in spite of service of the notice, the respondent-company failed to pay the amount as demanded by the petitioner, compelling the petitioner to file the present petition.