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

2006 Supreme(Cal) 157

TAPEN SEN, PRABIR KUMAR SAMANTA
UNIVERSAL BEARING AGENCY – Appellant
Versus
WPIL LIMITED – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
KOUSHIK CHAUDHURY, P.CHAKRAVARTY, R.BANERJEE, S.R.BHATTACHARYA, Vivek Junjunwala

Prabir Kumar Samanta, Tapen Sen, JJ.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is against the order dated 31. 1. 2005 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in C. A. No. 756 of 2004 arising out of C. P. No. 651 of 2001 whereby and whereunder he was pleased to direct that if the appellants have any further claim in respect of interest then they would be at liberty to take steps before the appropriate forum.

( 2 ) IN order to appreciate the arguments, it will be necessary to advert, very briefly, to the facts which are involved in this case. It appears that the appellants herein filed a winding up petition alleging that the respondent company was indebted to them to the extent of Rs. 14,81,239. 20/- on account of the balance price of the goods sold and delivered which, according to them, the company had failed to pay notwithstanding service of notice under section 434 of the Companies act, 1956. The aforementioned application for winding up was taken up on 10. 10. 2002 by a learned Single Judge of this Court who admitted the application after holding that the said; company was indebted to the appellant/petitioning creditor to the extent of Rs. 14,81,239. 20/-on account of balance price of the goods









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