Whether this case involves a substantial question v. M.H. MILLS & INDUSTRIES LTD
Case at a glance
- Order date
- 31 Dec 2010
- Bench
- M R SHAH
Outcome
Disposed of
circumstances, this petition is disposed of at
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India
- Companies Act, 2013 ss. 100, 391, 394
Judgment
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 4 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= IDEAL INDUSTRIAL MACHINE SHOPS - Petitioner(s) Versus M.H. MILLS & INDUSTRIES LTD. - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR MEHUL S SHAH for Petitioner(s) : 1,MR SURESH M SHAH for Petitioner(s) : 1, NANAVATI ASSOCIATES for Respondent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH Date : 15/12/2006 ORAL JUDGMENT Present Company Petition has been filed for winding up of the respondent Company, i.e. M.H. Mills & Industries Ltd., under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. COMP/287/1999 JUDGMENT
Earlier, this Company Petition was adjourned from time to time as the company was before the BIFR and was declared as a Sick Industrial Company. By way of Additional Affidavit, it has been submitted that the Scheme of Arrangement was submitted before this Court, and by Judgment and Order dated 1.7.2006, the learned Single Judge of this Court in Company Petition No. 25 of 2006 has sanctioned the Scheme of Arrangement in the nature of compromise with various classes of creditors and restructuring of debts, Demerger and Transfer of the Packaging Division of MH Mills and Industries Limited to M.H. Packaging (India) Limited and Reduction and Reorganisation of Capital under Section 100 read with Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act,
1956. It is not in dispute that the Scheme of Arrangement which has been sanctioned by this Court is binding to all creditors, secured and unsecured and also others. On going through the order passed by this Court sanctioning the Scheme COMP/287/1999 JUDGMENT of Arrangement in the nature of compromise, it is clear that as per Clause 3.5, sub-clause (vii), unsecured creditors like petitioner are required to be paid their dues. Thus, the petitioner is entitled to its dues as per the Scheme sanctioned by this Court, and more particularly under Clause
3.5 (vii) the aforesaid amount is to be paid in 5 different installments on or before 31st December
Operative part
2010. In view of the sanction of the scheme, no further order is required to be passed on the present petition which is for winding up of the respondent Company during implementation of the aforesaid Scheme of Arrangement. Under the circumstances, this petition is disposed of at this stage. No costs. It is obvious that in case scheme is not complied with, it will be open for the petitioner to take appropriate steps in accordance with law before appropriate forum. rmr. [ M.R. Shah, J.]
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: circumstances, this petition is disposed of at
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India; Companies Act, 2013 — ss. 100, 391, 394.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Gujarat High Court, on 31 Dec 2010. The bench was M R SHAH.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.