Store One Retail India Ltd. v. Waterfall Infra Pvt. Ltd. Cin No. U70102mh2010ptc201049

1/3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY PETITION NO.904 OF 2015 WITH SHOW CAUSE NOTICE NO.149 OF 2018 IN COMPANY PETITION NO.904 OF 2015 Store One Retail India Limited ....Petitioner Vs.

Waterfall Infra Private Limited ....Respondent ---- Mr. Tushar Gujjar a/w. Mr. Deepak Singh I/b. Solicis Lex for petitioner. Ms. Gaurangi Patil I/b. G P Associates for respondent and for noticee nos.1,3,5 and 6 in show cause notice no.149 of 2018. Mr. R.S. Bidkar I/b. Hariani and Co. for noticee nos.2 and 4 in show cause notice no.149 of 2018.

---- CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM, J.

DATE : 21st AUGUST 2018 P.C.:

Ms. Patil, counsel appearing for noticee nos.1,3,5 and 6 states that the entire outstanding of Rs.11,40,000/- plus cost and interest of Rs.50,000/- as ordered by this Court on 7th August 2018 has been paid by way of a demand draft in favour of petitioner. Mr. Gujjar, counsel for petitioner confirms having received the demand draft. Ms. Patil states that her Vakalatnama together with affidavit of respondent no.5 in reply to the show cause notice will be filed in the registry during the course of today. Ms. Patil states that in the affidavit, respondent no.5 has tendered unconditional apology and also given an explanation as to how the undertakings came to be breached. Ms. Patil

2/3 submits that respondents were expecting certain payments from certain parties which got delayed and hence were unable to comply with the undertakings given to this Court. Ms. Patil prays that since the entire claim of petitioner has been paid and the reply of respondent no.5 to the show cause notice, who is the main person behind the company though not in the board of directors of the company, be accepted as explanation to the show cause notice and the company petition as well as the winding up petition be suitably disposed. Ms. Patil prays that the show cause notice issued be recalled.

Mr. Gujjar states that the petition after admission was not advertised because the settlement terms were entered into and has no objection to withdraw the company petition. Mr. Gujjar also states that the cheques issued earlier by the company/Mr. Goenka shall be returned to Ms. Patil within a week from today. Statement accepted. Mr. Gujjar states that the Court may decide as to whether respondents to the show cause notice have purged the contempt alleged.

Having heard the counsel, I am inclined to grant leave to petitioner to withdraw the company petition. Company petition dismissed as withdrawn.

So far as contempt petition and show cause notice is concerned, respondent no.5 having tendered apology to the Court and having paid the

3/3 amounts as per the undertakings given to the Court, I would consider respondents having purged the contempt.

Show cause notice accordingly recalled. Contempt petition also stands disposed.

Digitally signed by Gauri Amit Gaekwad Date:

2018.08.23 19:36:30 +0530 Gauri Amit Gaekwad (K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)