OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR OF M/S. ATHREYONIX SYSTEMS v. SRI. ASHOK PRAKASH
Case at a glance
- Bench
- ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
- Neutral citation
- 2024:KHC:3379
Outcome
Allowed
(i) The application is allowed in part
Provisions considered
- Companies Act, 2013 s. 454
Key paragraphs
- Para 88. The respondent in support of his claim has adduced evidence. However, nothing is forthcoming from the evidence of the respondent to disbelieve the inference emanating from Ex.P1 and Ex.P2, the documents maintained by the erstwhile company in the normal course of its business. Under…
Judgment
OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR OF M/S. ATHREYONIX SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, IVTH FLOOR, "D AND F" WING, KENDRIYA SADAN, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE - 560 034. …APPLICANT Digitally signed by PRAMILA G V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA (BY SRI. SHRISHAIL NAVALGUND, ADVOCATE) AND:
SRI. ASHOK PRAKASH, NO.50, KAMAKSHI, III CROSS, CENTRAL EXCISE LAY-OUT, VIJAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 040.
SRI. PRADEEP VISAL, S/O. MR. DEVIDAS VISAL, NO.1/15, MADHAV BUILDING, NAMDEVAN APARTMENTS, - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:3379 CA No. 195 of 2007 IN COP.NO.53 of 2001 LUISWADI, THANE - 400 604.
SRI. PANKAJ KUMAR SHARMA, S/O. MR. S.L. TEJKAPAL, FLAT NO. 130, BHARATH APARTMENTS, SECTOR 13, ROHINI, NEW DELHI - 110 085.
SRI. G.R. SANGHVI, C/O. M/S. ASIAN ELECTRONICS, LIMTIED, D11, ROAD NO. 28, WAGLE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, THANE - 400 604. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. P.B. APPAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4(ABSENT); SRI. RAMESH ANANTHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS COMPANY APPLICATION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 543(1) OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, R/W RULE 260 OF THE COMPANY (COURT) RULES, 1959, PRAYING TO A) TO SUMMONS THE RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 MENTIONED IN THE APPLICATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXAMINATION WITH REGARD TO THE MATTER SPECIFIED THEREIN THIS COMPANY APPLICATION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: NC: 2024:KHC:3379 CA No. 195 of 2007 IN COP.NO.53 of 2001 - 3 - ORDER Heard.
2. This application recover Rs.8,26,079/- along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the respondents No.1 to 4 who are the former Directors of the Company viz., M/s Athreyonix Systems Private Limited. In addition, relief is sought for recovery of Rs.24,022/- along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the respondents. The company was ordered to be wound up in terms of the order dated
15.03.2002. Subsequent to the said order, after following the procedure relating to the publication of the notice, the Official Liquidator claims to have taken charge of the available assets of the company on different dates.
3. Thereafter, on verifying the records pertaining to the company, the Official Liquidator has filed this application seeking recovery of the aforementioned - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:3379 CA No. 195 of 2007 IN COP.NO.53 of 2001 amount of Rs.8,26,079/- on the premise that there is misfeasance on the part of the Directors who refused to hand over the assets of the company.
4. The respondents have entered appearance and have filed statement of objections. They have disputed the claim made in the petition. Thereafter, the evidence was recorded. One witness is examined on behalf of the applicant and one witness is examined on behalf of the respondent.
Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his claim would refer to Ex.P1, the balance sheet as on 15.03.2002 pertaining to the company in liquidation. In addition, Ex.P2 is also produced, which is the statement of affairs under Section 454 of the Companies Act, 1956. Referring to these two documents, it is urged on behalf of the applicant that the claim is very much substantiated as the documents at Ex.P1 and Ex.P2 are the documents maintained in the normal course of - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:3379 CA No. 195 of 2007 IN COP.NO.53 of 2001 business of the erstwhile company. It is forthcoming from the said documents viz., Ex.P1 that Rs.59,998/- is the value of the fixed asset as on 15.03.2002. In addition, it is also forthcoming that the value of the inventory is Rs.8,26,081/- as on 15.03.2002. Though Ex.P1 also reveals that Rs.12,899/- is the cash and bank balance, in the examination-in-chief, PW1 has stated that Rs.12,899/- is received by the Official Liquidator.
Ex.P1 also reveals that Rs.24,022/- is the amount of loan advanced by the erstwhile company. However, there are no records to enforce the said loan against the borrowers of the said company.
On perusal of the cross-examination, it is apparent that PW1 has admitted that Rs.60,000/- is recovered from the sale of some of the assets of the company. - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC:3379 CA No. 195 of 2007 IN COP.NO.53 of 2001
Operative part
The respondent in support of his claim has adduced evidence. However, nothing is forthcoming from the evidence of the respondent to disbelieve the inference emanating from Ex.P1 and Ex.P2, the documents maintained by the erstwhile company in the normal course of its business. Under circumstances, this court is of the view that the application is to be allowed in part. Hence, the following: ORDER (i) The application is allowed in part directing the respondents to jointly and severally to pay a sum of Rs.7,77,204/- along with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from 15.03.2002 till its payment. Sd/- JUDGE SS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36 CT:SNN
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: (i) The application is allowed in part
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Companies Act, 2013 — s. 454.
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.