0

All the winding up petitions filed in the courts in which hardly any proceedings have taken towards winding up of the company have to be compulsorily transferred to the NCLT- Delhi High Court.

Title: Aakash Engineers & Contractors v. Gaursons Hi-tech Infrastructure

Decided on: 10th October, 2023

+ CO.PET. 531/2016 & CO.APPL. 1671/2017

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA M. SINGH

Introduction

The Delhi High Court transferred a winding up petition made under Section 434 of the Companies Act, 1996 on the ground of Non Payment of Debt, to the NCLT as per the Legal Position settled in the case of Action Ispat and Power Limited v. Shyam Metallics and Energy Limited (2021) 2 SCC 641, and in view of Companies (Transfer of Pending Proceedings) Rules, 2016, as hardly any proceedings had been initiated towards winding up of the company because the petition was at a very Nascent stage and no substantive orders had been passed towards the winding up of the company.

Facts of the Case

In 2012 Respondents advertised for Contractors for one of its projects in Noida and thus hired the Petitioners and gave them several work orders for construction. They reassured them of Timely payments and Cooperation however when the petitioner began with the work the Respondents caused several difficulties for them during execution and failed to make payments.
The petitioners still completed the work on time and raised a bill after the completion for all the costs incurred. When the Respondents failed to pay that cost, they sent them a Legal Notice on 1st March 2016 as per section 431 (1) (a) of the Companies Act, 1956.
There was no reply given by the Respondent’s side hence the Petitioners filed the application for Winding up of the company under section 434 on the ground of Non-payment of Debts. An Interim order was passed on 25th July 2016, ordering the respondent company to not dispose of or alienate, or encumber directly or indirectly or part with any asset of the company except for the ordinary course of business or the payment of salary or statutory dues.
On, 10th Jan 2017 Respondents came up with their contentions that no notice was given to them under section 434 of the Companies Act, as claimed by the petitioner, and that on 3rd Feb 2016 itself, the Petitioners invoked the arbitration clause mentioned in the said work orders, they also submitted before the court that the present petition should not be in effect as an alternative remedy for dispute resolution has already been invoked.
Later a Rejoinder dated 25th May 2017 which was on record was found by the court which clearly showed that there were arbitration proceedings between both parties. On 16th of August 2018, the court asked the parties to file a copy of the award that was rendered through the Arbitration proceedings. After that, the petition was adjourned from time to time because either or none of the parties appeared. The provisional Liquidator was also not appointed in the present matter.

Court analysis and decision

After listening to both parties and looking at all the facts and circumstances of the case, Delhi HC in this case relied on the Judgement given in the case of Action Ispat and Power Limited v. Shyam Metalics and Energy Limited (2021), winding up proceedings which have not reached an advanced stage ought to be shifted to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Only when a Company Liquidator has been assigned and the proceedings have arrived at a phase where it would be irrevocable, making it not possible to reverse time that the Company court must continue with the winding up, instead of moving the proceedings to the NCLT. It would depend upon the facts and circumstances of the case whether that phase has arrived yet, the court examined that in this present case that advanced stage hasn’t been reached yet and it’s still at a very nascent stage and no substantive orders have been passed towards winding up of the company, including the appointment of the Liquidator.
Hence the order was passed to transfer the electronic record of the petition to the NCLT within one week by the Registry. The interim order was allowed to continue till the first hearing of the present petition by NCLT.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Aditi

Click here to view judgement

 

0

The Kerala High Court ruled in favor of the company, applying the “reverse onus” principle and convicted the accused in a cheque bounce case.

Title: POPULAR MOTOR CORPORATION VS STATE OF KERALA

Decided on: 17th, OCTOBER 2023

Writ C No. – 1412 OF 2011

CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.S. DIAS

 INTRODUCTION 

The High Court of Kerala in Ernakulam, India, heard this criminal appeal case. It concerns claims made in accordance with Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act regarding dishonored checks. Popular Motor Corporation, the appellant, filed the complaint against Vinod Bhaskar, the accused, who was found not guilty by the trial court because of alleged flaws in the complaint.

The High Court considered whether the complainant firm had the legal authority to file the complaint after the case was appealed. The accused was found guilty after the High Court reversed the trial court’s ruling in favor of the complainant. This case raises legal concerns about the prerequisites for submitting complaints under Section 138, especially in situations where the complainant is a business or is represented by authorized staff. It also highlights how the burden of proof in these kinds of situations is shifted to the accused.

FACTS OF THE CASE 

Popular Motor Corporation lodged a complaint against Vinod Bhaskar in this instance for sending out two cheques that bounced. The High Court decided in favor of Popular Motor Corporation, highlighting the complainant’s legal position and the accused’s obligations under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, despite the trial court’s finding that the accused was not guilty.

COURTS ANALYSIS AND DECISION

The High Court ruled in favor of the company, applying the “reverse onus” principle and convicting the accused. In addition to being sentenced to one day in prison, the accused was also mandated to pay the company damages.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer. “

Written by- Kusuma R

Cheque Bounce Case Kerala Hc

 

 

 

0

In an NDPS case, the High Court has granted bail owing to a 10-gram discrepancy in the inventory of seized charas: Bombay High Court

Title: Sunil Shishupal Nayak v. State of Maharashtra

Decided on: OCTOBER 23, 2023

Writ C No. – Bail Application NO. 1450 OF 2023

CORAM: M. S. Karnik, J

INTRODUCTION

Sunil Shishupal Nayak requested bail in this case in order to face charges under sections 8(c), 20(c), and 29 of the NDPS Act. There was a discrepancy in Charas possession in this case. The applicant claimed that drying caused a weight change after being arrested with one kilogram and ten grams of Charas. The NDPS Act’s provisions and the significance of the weight disparity were the deciding factors in the court’s decision regarding the bail application.

FACTS OF THE CASE

In a case filed on April 16, 2022, Sunil Shishupal Nayak was charged under the NDPS Act for having a large quantity of “Charas.” A weight disparity surfaced during the legal proceedings; at first, Nayak was discovered in possession of 1 kg and 10 grams of Charas, which were deemed to be commercial quantities; however, the recorded weight was only 1 kg following a 59-day drying period. The charges and penalties in the case were contingent upon Charas’s legal classification. Nayak requested bail, which would have affected his freedom to stand trial.

COURTS ANALYSIS AND DECISION

 The court granted bail to Sunil Shishupal Nayak, who was charged under the NDPS Act in connection with a “Charas” possession case involving a weight discrepancy, was granted bail by the court. The court declined to make any pretrial rulings, emphasizing that matters pertaining to the weight of the contraband should be resolved during the trial. The results of the investigation, Nayak’s prolonged detention, and his lack of previous criminal history all played a role in the decision. Conditions attached to bail were put in place to make sure he cooperated with the court system.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer. “

Written by- Kusuma R

Bombay Hc

0

The Calcutta High Court refused to quash legal proceedings against a tour operator accused of misusing booking funds, citing evidence of potential criminal breach of trust

Title: Ashish Kumar Vs. State of West Bengal & Anr.

Decided on: 19th, October 2023

Writ C No. – CRR 197 of 2023

CORAM: The Hon’ble Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee.

INTRODUCTION

 In this case Ashish Kumar attempted to have criminal charges brought under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code set aside. Dr. Swapnil Jaiswal filed a complaint at the start of the case alleging that Ashish Kumar had defaulted on payment for a tour package.

Ashish’s request was denied by the court, which decided that more research and a trial were necessary because the charges suggested possible offenses. This case highlights the necessity of differentiating between civil and criminal cases as well as establishing a sufficient basis for filing criminal charges.

FACTS OF THE CASE

A group of travellers made a reservation for a tour package with Ashish Kumar, who is said to have taken money but failed to pay hotel owners and taxi drivers. Ashish was the subject of a criminal complaint brought under IPC Sections 406 and 420. Ashish’s request to have the case dismissed was denied, so the court case could go forward.

COURTS ANALYSIS AND DECISION 

The case of Ashish Kumar, who was accused of taking money for a tour package but not paying hotel owners and taxi drivers as agreed, was examined by the court. The court determined that the accusations of cheating and breach of trust could be crimes if they were to be believed at face value. Consequently, it denied Ashish Kumar’s application to stop the proceedings, enabling the legal matter to continue.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer. “

Written by- Kusuma R

Calcutta Hc 2

0

Due to their “contemptuous” behaviour in the acting Chief Justice’s chamber, two people were placed under arrest. The Orissa High Court.

Title: Pravat Kumar Padhi & Ors. v. State of Odisha & Ors.

Decided on: October 19, 2023

Writ C No. – 21030 of 2023

CORAM:  Acting Chief. Justice Dr. B.R. Saarangi Mr. Justice Murahari Sri Raman.

INTRODUCTION

In this case, the Orissa High Court is debating the validity of establishing a court in Konark. Numerous legal challenges, disputes over land allocation, and disrespectful conduct in the courtroom have all occurred there, resulting in the arrest of two people.

FACTS OF THE CASE

The conflict in this case relates to the construction of a court in Konark, Odisha. The petitioners have filed several legal challenges, there have been delays in the distribution of land, and two people have been arrested for acting disrespectfully in court. The petitioners and the court have taken numerous actions and issued numerous orders throughout the case’s complicated history.

COURTS ANALYSIS AND DECISION

The earlier court orders were ultimately upheld by the Hon’ble Apex Court. The petitioners and another person also disrupted and behaved disrespectfully during the court proceedings, which resulted in their arrest for contempt of court. The writ petition was dismissed by the court after it determined there was nothing further to decide. 

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer. “

Written by- Kusuma R

 

Orissa Hc

 

1 2 3 11