IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
Murthal Auto (p) Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Hylex Trade Links (P) Ltd. – Respondent
CO.PET. 802 of 2016 and CO.APPL. 1401 of 2017, 494 of 2023
Decided On : 24-08-2023
Companies Act - Winding Up - Sections 433, 434, 439 - The judgment discusses the application of Sections 433, 434, and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956 in a case seeking winding up of a company. It also refers to the transfer of pending proceedings to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) as per the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The court applies Rule 5 of the MCA notification dated 7th December, 2016 and the judgment in Citicorp International Limited v. Shiv-Vani Oil & Gas Exploration Services Limited to direct the transfer of the petition to the NCLT.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought winding up of the respondent company under Sections 433, 434, and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956, due to non-payment for repair services provided. The respondent had not appeared in the proceedings, and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 had come into force during the pendency of the petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petition was at a nascent stage, the respondent had not been served, and the liquidator had not been appointed. Applying Section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, Rule 5 of the MCA notification dated 7th December, 2016, and the judgment in Citicorp International Limited v. Shiv-Vani Oil & Gas Exploration Services Limited, the court directed the transfer of the petition to the NCLT.
Issues: The main issue was the transfer of the winding up petition to the NCLT in light of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and the relevant provisions of the Companies Act, 1956.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied Section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, Rule 5 of the MCA notification dated 7th December, 2016, and the judgment in Citicorp International Limited v. Shiv-Vani Oil & Gas Exploration Services Limited to decide that the petition should be transferred to the NCLT due to its nascent stage and the non-appearance of the respondent.
Final Decision: The court directed the transfer of the petition to the NCLT and scheduled the appearance of the parties before the NCLT on a specified date. The electronic records of the court were to be transmitted to the Registrar NCLT, and the petition, along with all pending applications, was disposed of.
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present petition has been filed under Sections 433, 434 and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956 seeking winding up of the Respondent-Hylex Trade Links (P) Ltd. The case of the Petitioner-Murthal Auto Pvt. Ltd. is that it is an authorized Maruti Service station engaged in the business of running service station of Maruti vehicles. The Respondent is a dealer in home appliances and other electronic items.
3. According to the Petitioner the Respondent approached the Petitioner for repair of vehicle bearing No. DL-1LE-2062, Model Maruti Eco Flexi C in the name of the Respondent Company, which had met with an accident on 29th July, 2015. For repairing the vehicle a sum of Rs.3,23,313/- was quoted by the Petitioner and the same is stated to have been agreed to by the Respondent. As per the schedule of payment, the Respondent had to make a complete payment of Rs.1,64,121/-, however as per the Petitioner, the same has been illegally retained by the Respondent.
4. It is stated by the Petitioner that the vehicle was insured by New India Insurance Co. Ltd. vide Policy bearing No. 35420031140100003503 and that the Respondent has received the payment from the Insurance Company towards the said bill amount. Copies of the invoices etc. have also been placed on record by the Petitioner.
5. In the present case, notice was initially issued by this Court on 20th October, 2016. Vide the said order the Court had also given directions to the Respondent to disclose certain details. The relevant part of the said order is as under:
"In addition, the Managing Director or in his absence, all the Directors of the respondent company shall file their personal affidavits setting the following:
(i) All information and particulars with regard to their shareholding in the company, their involvement in the affairs of the company and the nature of steps taken by them with regard to the management of the company:
(ii) The Profit & Loss Account and the Balance Sheets of the Respondent Company for the last three years;
(iii) The list of the bank accounts of the Respondent Company;
(iv) The names and residential addresses of the Directors and com pan)secretary of the company along with their PAN and DIN numbers;
(v) The particulars of assets held in the name of all the directors or the respondent company along with the dates of acquisition as well as the nature of their right, title and interest therein; to be disclosed in a sealed cover tar the time being;
(vi) The address of the Registered Office and the Corporate or branch offices, if any, of the Respondent Company;
(vii) The location of the statutory records and books of account or the company;
(viii) The list of immovable assets, land and building etc. of the respondent company, along with full particulars thereof sufficient to accurately identify and locate the said assets;
(ix) The details of location of the assets of the company and their value;
(x) Details of the debtors and creditors of the company with their complete addresses;
(xi) The details of workmen/employees and any amount outstanding to them; and
(xii) The respondent company as well as its Directors shall disclose their connection with any other entities whether incorporated or not and the extent of their interest therein, with full particulars.
The said affidavits shall be filed within six weeks from today with an advance copy to counsel for the petitioner.
In case the said affidavits are not filed for any reason, the concerned Directors, including the Managing Director of the respondent company shall remain personally present in Court on the next date of hearing, in order to enable this Court to examine them, if required, on that date.
Till the next date of hearing, the respondent company shall not dispose of or alienate or encumber either directly or indirectly or otherwise part with possession of any assets of the company to the tune of Rs.1,64, 121.111-, except in the
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, and Rule 5 of the MCA notification dated 7th December, 2016, in directing the transfer o....
The main legal principle established in the judgment is that in cases where the winding up process is not at an advanced stage, the matter is to be transferred to the NCLT in accordance with the Inso....
A winding-up petition can be transferred to the NCLT without a formal application if no irreversible steps have been taken in the liquidation process.
The discretion to transfer winding up proceedings to NCLT under Section 434(1)(c) of the Companies Act must prioritize potential corporate revival, and no irreversible actions should have occurred.
The court applied the provisions of the Companies Act 1956 and the judgment in Action Ispat and Power Limited v. Shyam Metalics and Energy Limited, (2021) 2 SCC 641, to decide on impleadment, release....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the obligation to transfer winding-up proceedings to the NCLT in the absence of irreversible or exceptional circumstances, as per the amended Secti....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that winding up petitions at a nascent stage should be transferred to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) in accordance with Section 434 of th....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.