Full Text
Translation output
% 19.08.2011
Present: Mr. Sanjeev Singh, Advocate for petitioner.
+ Co. Appl. 1620/2011 in Co. Pet. 349/2011
* (Reliance Capital Ltd. vs. M/s. PRL Projects and Infrastructure Ltd.)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, application stands disposed of
+ Co. Pet. 349/2011 & Co. Appi. 1618-1619/2011
* (Reliance Capital Ltd. vs. M/s. PRL Projects and Infrastructure Ltd.)
Present winding up petition has been filed under Section 433(e) read with Sections 434 and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956 stating that respondent-company is unable to pay its debt allegedly amounting to Rs. 17,34,629/-.
The relevant facts of present case are that the respondent- company is alleged to have taken a number of personal loans from the
• petitioner-company totaling to Rs.1,29,28,1931-. It is the allegation of the petitioner-company that respondent-company was not regular in repaying its loan amount in accordance with the Agreement executed between the parties.
However, on perusal of the paper book, it is apparent that respondent-company has repaid to the petitioner-company much more
2011:DHC:7560 than the principal sum. The only dispute is with regard to delayed payment charges, cheque bouncing charges, prepayment charges of outstanding principal, interest on the outstanding amount as well as alleged pending installment.
In the opinion of this Court, since there is ho admission of the debt by the respondent-company, present case would require a trial.
Accordingly, present petition and pending applications are disposed of with liberty to petitioner to file an appropriate recovery proceeding against the respondent-company in accordance with law.
Needless to say, the dispute resolution authority would decide the disputes between the parties on merits, without being influenced by any observations made by this Court.
MANMOHAN,J
AUGUST 19, 2011 is
Present: Mr. Sanjeev Singh, Advocate for petitioner.
+ Co. Appl. 1620/2011 in Co. Pet. 349/2011
* (Reliance Capital Ltd. vs. M/s. PRL Projects and Infrastructure Ltd.)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, application stands disposed of
+ Co. Pet. 349/2011 & Co. Appi. 1618-1619/2011
* (Reliance Capital Ltd. vs. M/s. PRL Projects and Infrastructure Ltd.)
Present winding up petition has been filed under Section 433(e) read with Sections 434 and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956 stating that respondent-company is unable to pay its debt allegedly amounting to Rs. 17,34,629/-.
The relevant facts of present case are that the respondent- company is alleged to have taken a number of personal loans from the
• petitioner-company totaling to Rs.1,29,28,1931-. It is the allegation of the petitioner-company that respondent-company was not regular in repaying its loan amount in accordance with the Agreement executed between the parties.
However, on perusal of the paper book, it is apparent that respondent-company has repaid to the petitioner-company much more
2011:DHC:7560 than the principal sum. The only dispute is with regard to delayed payment charges, cheque bouncing charges, prepayment charges of outstanding principal, interest on the outstanding amount as well as alleged pending installment.
In the opinion of this Court, since there is ho admission of the debt by the respondent-company, present case would require a trial.
Accordingly, present petition and pending applications are disposed of with liberty to petitioner to file an appropriate recovery proceeding against the respondent-company in accordance with law.
Needless to say, the dispute resolution authority would decide the disputes between the parties on merits, without being influenced by any observations made by this Court.
MANMOHAN,J
AUGUST 19, 2011 is
.
2011:DHC:7560
2011:DHC:7560
JUDGMENT