SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1992 Supreme(Kar) 391

K. R. BALASUBRAMANYAM – Appellant
Versus
BELLARY SPINNING AND WEAVING COMPANY LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION), BELLARY – Respondent


Advocates:
M.ASHWATHNARAYAN REDDY, RADHESH PRABHU, S.M.CHANDRASEKHAR, TUKURAM S.PAL

K. J. SHETTY, J.

( 1 ) THIS company application is filed by one of the shareholders of the respondent-company, under section 391 of the Companies Act, which was directed to be liquidated by the order of this court, dated 19-10-1987/6-11-1987 in company petition no. 34 of 1986.

( 2 ) BRIEF facts are:the respondent-company was wound up under the provisions of section 433 (e) and (f) of the companies act (hereinafter referred to as the 'act') since the company was unable to pay the debts to the creditors. This court has observed that the respondent-company has failed to discharge the liability which exceeds Rs. 2. 5 crores, exclusive of interest and is unable to pay the debts within the meaning of section 433 (e) of the act. The respondent-company has preferred an appeal against the said order in o. s. a. no. 12 of 1987, which came to be dismissed.

( 3 ) DURING the pendency of the appeal, this company application was filed by theshareholder and also the managing director of the said company. The prayer in the application is that the scheme of arrangement/compromise under section 391 of the Act, which is sponsored by the applicants highly beneficial to the interest of creditors at large





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top