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

2002 Supreme(Del) 1197

VIKRAMAJIT SEN
ANIL PRATAP SINGH – Appellant
Versus
ONIDA SAVAK LIMITED – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
JAYANT NATH, R.P.SHARMA

VIKRAMAJIT SEN

( 1 ) THE Petition has been filed under Section 433 (e) and 434 (1) (a) of the Companies Act praying for the winding up of the Respondent Company on the ground that it is indebted to the Petitioner for a sum of rs. 10,62,022. 96 as on 31. 8. 1997. It has been averred that the statutory notice dated 6. 10. 1997 claiming the afore-mentioned sum of money, comprising rs. 6,18,035. 00 as the principal sum and Rs. 4,43,987. 96 as interest was outstanding against various bills raised for providing advertising services to the respondent Company by the Petitioner.

( 2 ) ADMITTEDLY, the statutory notice was duly replied to in terms of the letter dated 27. 10. 1997. In it, reliance was placed on letter dated 24. 4. 1995 written by the Petitioner to M/s. Adonis (India) Ltd. which is undisputably a sister concern of the respondent Company. It reads as follows:-

"dear Sir,

THIS has reference to our discussions at your office on 20th April, 1995 regarding the Hoarding sites in Delhi metro. As decided and agreed mutually between you and us, we would like to inform you that we will not accept any sort of deductions or adjustments on our bills beyond 1st April 95 against goods supplied o














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