TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1989 (2) TMI 317
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g for the Respondent. JUDGMENT G.R. Majithia, J. - This petition under sections 433, 434 and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short "the Act"), has been filed against the respondent-company for passing a winding-up order. The facts first: The respondent-company, on April 26, 1985, invited tenders for the supply of HPDE bags. The petitioner submitted the tender on April 26, 1985, itself. On ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ter, the Chairman of the respondent-company rescinded the order of cancellation and the petitioner supplied 50,000 HPDE bags. The petitioner supplied 60,000 HPDE bags at Hanumangarh to the respondent-company between September 11, 1986, and September 16, 1986. The petitioner had supplied 20 per cent, additional HPDE bags as provided, in the agreement dated October 27, 1985. The payment of sale pric....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or payment for the supply of extra HPDE bags. On May 27, 1988, learned counsel for the respondent handed over a cheque bearing No. 361467 for Rs. 2,44,166.64 drawn on the Punjab and Sind Bank, Chandigarh, to learned counsel for the petitioner. The same was accepted pursuant to the order dated May 20, 1988, and the petition was posted for arguments on the limited question "whether direction as to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt of the price. Since the full price was not paid by the buyers within a reasonable time from the date of taking delivery, I think it will be just and equitable that the buyer is directed to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of delivery of goods till May 27, 1988, on which date the part payment of the principal amount was made in court. The respondent-company has no defence ....