Brahaspati Iron And Steel Company Private Limited v. Recon Steel And Power Limited

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR COMA No. 9 of 2017 Brahaspati Iron And Steel Company Private Limited A Company Incorporated Under The Relevant Provisions Of The Companies Act, 1956, Through Its Director Having Its Registered Office At A-29, Amrapali Society, In Front Of M M I Hospital, Pachpedi Naka, Raipur Police Station Tikrapara, Raipur, Chhattisgarh - 492001 ---- Appellant

Versus

Recon Steel And Power Limited A Company Incorporated Under The Provisions Of The Companies Act, 1956, Having Its Registered Office At 176, Amadi Mandir Ward, Deepak Nagar, Durg, Police Station Mohan Nagar, Durg, Chhattisgarh Through Its Director Shri Arvind Jain ---- Respondent For Appellant : Shri Sachin Singh Rajput, Advocate.

For Respondent : Shri Ankit Singhal, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Judgment on Board 19/11/2018 Per Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice 1.

Heard on I.A. No.01 of 2017, application for condonation of delay of 239 days in instituting the appeal. We are not satisfied with the reasons indicated therein, therefore, condonation application is fit to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. Besides the above, we tried to go into the merits of the appeal as well to satisfy our judicial conscious as if the Appellant has a case. 2.

Perused the order dated 27.07.2016. The learned Company Judge after examining the explanation for non-payment came to a conclusion that there is no supporting evidence or material to justify non-payment of various outstanding dues for supply, which were admittedly made to the Appellant-Company. It is because of failure on their part to honour and settle the dues that batch of the company petitions came to be filed.

3.

Not finding any bonafide in defence so taken and keeping in mind that a similar order had already been passed in Company Appeal No.8 of 2015, in which issuance of advertisement had been issued on 04.04.2016, the learned Company Judge has taken a consistent view, in which we do not find any infirmity. 4.

In the result, we do not find any merit even otherwise to interfere. The Company appeal stands dismissed.

Sd/- Sd/- (Ajay Kumar Tripathi) (Parth Prateem Sahu) CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE Anu