Company v. Since
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Companies Act, 2013 ss. 433, 434(1)(A)
Judgment
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused petition.
The petitioner invoked the jurisdiction Court Sections 433 Section 434 (1)(A) Companies Act, 1956 for winding up of the respondent company.
Invoices are brought on record. The details incorporated 7 petition. The petitioner Company demanded respondent time. Since response, statutory notice issued no. respondent-company calling [ 2 ] outstanding within 21 days. Thus, respondent company served statutory notice. Inspite receipt statutory notice neither nor any amount towards liability was paid by the respondent company.
In the above backdrop, this winding up petitioner to wind respondent company. The respondent served notice petition. However, remain absent. Consequently, respondent company neglected outstanding petitioner company. All allegations petition
unchallenged. petitioner a invoke jurisdiction Section 434 (1)(a) The Companies Act,
1956. Under circumstances, the respondent company is liable to be wound up.
In the result, the petition is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) with no order as to costs. (V.C.DAGA,J) (V.C.DAGA,J) (V.C.DAGA,J) [ 3 ]
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Companies Act, 2013 — ss. 433, 434(1)(A).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 14 Feb 2007. The bench was V C DAGA.
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.