CA No. 2126 of 2013 (filed by the Respondent u/O 9 Companies Rules r/W Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC)

1. This is an application filed by the Respondent, Prem Power Construction Private Limited (‘PPCL’), under Rule 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules (‘Company Rules’), read with Order XXXIX Rule 4 of the CPC and Section 151 of CPC for, inter alia, setting aside the ex parte interim order dated 15th February 2013 and the order dated 1st May 2013 passed by the Court.

2. The background to this application is that HDFC Bank Limited (‘HDFC’) filed the above petition seeking the winding up of PPCL under Section 433 (1) (e) of the Companies Act, 1956 (‘CA’). When the petition was first listed on 5th February 2013, the Court enquired whether HDFC, which is admittedly a secured creditor of PPCL, was interested in pursuing the petition. Learned counsel for HDFC sought a short adjournment. On 15th February 2013, the Court was informed by learned counsel for HDFC that it did not have any charge on any of the immovable properties of PPCL in respect of the loan advanced to it. Notice was then directed to be issued to PPCL with a direction to its Managing Director (‘MD’) to file an affidavit within fo