Appellant Vs. Respondent

Appellant vs Respondent

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Jun 17, 2014

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1152193

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1152193
Court: Kolkata High Court
Judge: Nadira Patherya
Decided On: Jun 17, 2014
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Appellant

Respondent

Excerpt

order sheet cp no.485 of 2011 in the high court at calcutta original jurisdiction humayan properties ltd.and bharti airtel ltd.before: the hon'ble justice patherya date : 17th june, 2014. mr.reetobroto mitra, sk.nurul arefin for petitioner. the court : this matter has appeared at the post advertisement stage. by order dated 10th june, 2013 direction was given for filing an affidavit-in-opposition. such affidavit has also been filed. on 23rd september, 2013 the company informed the court that there was all possibility of settlement between the parties. the sum of rs.5 lakhs directed to be deposited by order dated 14th january, 2013 has also been returned to the company by order dated 23rd september, 2013. the principal sum has also been paid and all that now needs to be paid to the petitioning creditor by the company is sums on account of interest which sum was to be paid within a fortnight from the order dated 3rd september, 2012. the said order was challenged in appeal which appeal was disposed of by order dated 14th january, 2013. as the order dated 3rd september, 2012 was not interfered with the sum on account of interest was to be paid within a fortnight from the order dated 14th january, 2013. the said sum on account of interest has not been paid. none has also appeared on behalf of the company this day. all that has been sought to be alleged is a due of rs.13,56,843/- on account of sales tax or vat but no contemporaneous document has been annexed to the affidavit filed at the post advertisement stage. the inability of the company to pay its debt is apparent and accordingly the company is wound up. let steps be taken by the official liquidator to take possession of the books, records, documents, assets and properties of the company now in liquidation. urgent certified photocopy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all requisite formalities. ( patherya, j.) pa

Full Judgment

ORDER

SHEET CP No.485 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction HUMAYAN PROPERTIES LTD.AND BHARTI AIRTEL LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 17th June, 2014.

Mr.Reetobroto Mitra, Sk.Nurul Arefin for petitioner.

The Court : This matter has appeared at the post advertisement stage.

By order dated 10th June, 2013 direction was given for filing an affidavit-in-opposition.

Such affidavit has also been filed.

On 23rd September, 2013 the company informed the Court that there was all possibility of settlement between the parties.

The sum of Rs.5 lakhs directed to be deposited by order dated 14th January, 2013 has also been returned to the company by order dated 23rd September, 2013.

The principal sum has also been paid and all that now needs to be paid to the petitioning creditor by the company is sums on account of interest which sum was to be paid within a fortnight from the order dated 3rd September, 2012.

The said order was challenged in appeal which appeal was disposed of by order dated 14th January, 2013.

As the order dated 3rd September, 2012 was not interfered with the sum on account of interest was to be paid within a fortnight from the order dated 14th January, 2013.

The said sum on account of interest has not been paid.

None has also appeared on behalf of the company this day.

All that has been sought to be alleged is a due of Rs.13,56,843/- on account of sales tax or VAT but no contemporaneous document has been annexed to the affidavit filed at the post advertisement stage.

The inability of the company to pay its debt is apparent and accordingly the company is wound up.

Let steps be taken by the Official Liquidator to take possession of the books, records, documents, assets and properties of the company now in liquidation.

Urgent certified photocopy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all requisite formalities.

( PATHERYA, J.) pa

Same Court & Year Kolkata · 2014 Same Parties Appellant vs Respondent Same Subject Education Same Judge Nadira Patherya