TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 1522
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Sections 434 and 439 of the Act by the petitioner company, seeking winding up of the respondent company on the grounds of non-payment of outstanding dues amounting to Rs. 2,48,39,128/- in CO.PET. 299/2015 and Rs. 2,34,53,258/- in CO.PET. 354/2015, along with due interest. CO.PET. 299/2015 2. Briefly stated, the respondent company issued a work order dated 15.05.2014, bearing No. LDH-1/Addl Work/0101/R-1, in favour of the petitioner company for the purposes of carrying out certain work at Fortis Hospital, Ludhiana; and said work was completed by the petitioner to the satisfaction of the respondent company within the time stipulated in the work order. 3. Pursuant to the work done, the petitioner company raised bills dated 14.08.2014 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... executed by the petitioner under the Work Order dated 14.05.2014. CO.PET. 354/2015 5. This petition constitutes similar facts as in the CO.PET. 299/2015, except that it is in respect of a Work Order dated 12.05.2014 issued in favour of the petitioner. Thereafter, the work is stated to have been executed by the petitioner and a bill for a sum of Rs. 2,34,53,258/- was raised. However, the said amount due to the petitioner remained unpaid. Since the respondent company failed/neglected to discharge its liability, the petitioner was constrained to serve a statutory legal notice dated 03.02.2015, calling upon the respondent company to repay the amount due. The respondent company in its reply dated 18.02.2015, stated that the Work Order dat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mandated to be compulsorily transferred to the NCLT but at the discretion of the Court, which discretion could only be exercised in case an appropriate application has been moved seeking transfer of the petition. It is thus urged that since no such application seeking transfer has been moved in the present petition, the matter should continue before this Court and not be transferred to the NCLT. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decisions in: (i) Kaledonia Jute and Fibres Private Limited v. Axis Nirman and Industries Limited & Ors. (2021) 2 SCC 403 ; and (ii) Action Ispat and Power Private Limited v. Shyam Metalics and Energy Limited (2021) 2 SCC 641. 9. Per contra, it is submitted on behalf of the respondent ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), immediately before such date shall stand transferred to the Tribunal and the Tribunal shall dispose of such matters, proceedings or cases in accordance with the provisions of this Act; (b) any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the Company Law Board made before such date may file an appeal to the High Court within sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order of the Company Law Board to him on any question of law arising out of such order: Provided that the High Court may if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing an appeal within the said period, allow it to be filed within a further period not exceeding sixty days; (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ut the company has not been dissolved before the 1st April, 2017 shall continue to be dealt with in accordance with provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959.] Provided further that any party or parties to any proceedings relating to the winding up of companies pending before the any Court immediately before the commencement of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Ordinance, 2018, may file an application for transfer of such proceedings and the Court may by order transfer such proceedings to the Tribunal and the proceedings so transferred shall be dealt with by the Tribunal as an application for initiation of corporate insolvency resolution process under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Company Liquidator may carry on the business of the company, so far as may be necessary, for the beneficial winding up of the company, and may even sell the company as a going concern. So long as no actual sales of the immovable or movable properties have taken place, nothing irreversible is done which would warrant a Company Court staying its hands on a transfer application made to it by a creditor or any party to the proceedings. It is only where the winding up proceedings have reached a stage where it would be irreversible, making it impossible to set the clock back that the Company Court must proceed with the winding up, instead of transferring the proceedings to the NCLT to now be decided in accordance with the provisions of the Code. ....