2006 (2) TMI 297

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gs of small and individual investors through various schemes inviting subscriptions from prospective investors and to channelise the funds so collected into the capital market for attractive returns. The respondent-company is a public limited company by shares, the authorised capital of which is Rs. 12,75,00,000. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent-company after having declared dividend for the financial year 2000-01 has failed to remit the same to the petitioner. The dividend payable to the petitioner was Rs. 35,52,882.50 on the record date, i.e., 2nd June, 2001. The said dividend is a debt due, and payable by the respondent to the petitioner and, thus, the respondent-company is liable to be wound-up. 3. Though the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....principal amount of debt to the creditor after winding up proceedings have been initiated before the company Judge. It was held that where the company Judge is seized of the matter after when the liability to pay the principal debt has not been disputed by the company sought to be wound up, the forum of the company Judge is the appropriate forum for determining as to whether the creditor was entitled to interest on the amount in question or not. Still further, reliance is also placed upon a decision of Division Bench of this court in as Stephen Chemicals Ltd. v. Delhi Cloth & General Mills Co. Ltd. [1985] 1 Comp. LJ 359, wherein it has been held that it cannot be held that the dispute about the payment of interest is bona fide. 5. On the o....