Full Judgment Text
$~C11
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
th
Date of Decision: 24 August, 2023
+ CO.PET. 802/2016 and CO.APPL. 1401/2017, 494/2023
| Mr. Kumar Bhaskar, Advocate (M: | |
| 9810028445). |
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present petition has been filed under Sections 433, 434 and 439 of
the Companies Act, 1956 seeking winding up of the Respondent - Hylex
Trade Links (P) Ltd. The case of the Petitioner- Murthal Auto Pvt. Ltd. is that
it is an authorized Maruti Service station engaged in the business of running
service station of Maruti vehicles. The Respondent is a dealer in home
appliances and other electronic items.
3. According to the Petitioner the Respondent approached the Petitioner
for repair of vehicle bearing No. DL-1LE-2062, Model Maruti Eco Flexi C in
the name of the Respondent Company, which had met with an accident on
th
29 July, 2015. For repairing the vehicle a sum of Rs. 3,23,313/- was quoted
by the Petitioner and the same is stated to have been agreed to by the
Respondent. As per the schedule of payment, the Respondent had to make a
complete payment of Rs. 1,64,121/-, however as per the Petitioner, the same
has been illegally retained by the Respondent.
CO.PET. 802/2016 Page 1 of 9
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DHIRENDER KUMAR
Signing Date:31.08.2023
16:59:37
4. It is stated by the Petitioner that the vehicle was insured by New India
Insurance Co. Ltd. vide Policy bearing No. 35420031140100003503 and that
the Respondent has received the payment from the Insurance Company
towards the said bill amount. Copies of the invoices etc. have also been placed
on record by the Petitioner.
th
5. In the present case, notice was initially issued by this Court on 20
October, 2016. Vide the said order the Court had also given directions to the
Respondent to disclose certain details. The relevant part of the said order is as
under:
“In addition, the Managing Director or in his absence,
all the Directors of the respondent company shall file
their personal affidavits setting the following:-
(i) All information and particulars with regard to their
shareholding in the company, their involvement in the
affairs of the company and the nature of steps taken by
them with regard to the management of the company:
(ii) The Profit & Loss Account and the Balance Sheets
of the Respondent Company for the last three years;
(iii) The list of the bank accounts of the Respondent
Company;
(iv) The names and residential addresses of the
Directors and com pan)secretary of the company along
with their PAN and DIN numbers;
(v) The particulars of assets held in the name of all the
directors or the respondent company along with the
dates of acquisition as well as the nature of their right,
title and interest therein; to be disclosed in a sealed
cover tar the time being;
(vi) The address of the Registered Office and the
Corporate or branch offices, if any, of the Respondent
Company;
(vii) The location of the statutory records and books of
account or the company;
CO.PET. 802/2016 Page 2 of 9
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DHIRENDER KUMAR
Signing Date:31.08.2023
16:59:37
(viii) The list of immovable assets, land and building etc.
of the respondent company, along with full particulars
thereof sufficient to accurately identify and locate the
said assets;
(ix) The details of location of the assets of the company
and their value;
(x) Details of the debtors and creditors of the company
with their complete addresses;
(xi) The details of workmen/employees and any amount
outstanding to them; and
(xii) The respondent company as well as its Directors
shall disclose their connection with any other entities
whether incorporated or not and the extent of their
interest therein, with full particulars.
The said affidavits shall be filed within six weeks from
today with an advance copy to counsel for the
petitioner.
In case the said affidavits are not filed for any reason,
the concerned Directors, including the Managing
Director of the respondent company shall remain
personally present in Court on the next date of hearing,
in order to enable this Court to examine them, if
required, on that date.
Till the next date of hearing, the respondent company
shall not dispose of or alienate or encumber either
directly or indirectly or otherwise part with possession
of any assets of the company to the tune of Rs. 1,64,
121.111-, except in the ordinary course of business and
for the payment of salaries and statutory dues.”
6. The matter has since then remained pending and the Respondent has
not entered appearance till date.
7. During the pendency of this petition, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy
Code, 2016 has been enacted and pending proceedings under Section 434 of
the Companies Act, 1956 are to be transferred to the National Company Law
Tribunal (NCLT). The said section reads as under:
CO.PET. 802/2016 Page 3 of 9
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DHIRENDER KUMAR
Signing Date:31.08.2023
16:59:37
“ 434. Transfer of certain pending proceedings
(1) On such date as may be notified by the Central
Government in this behalf,-
(a) all matters, proceedings or cases pending before the
Board of Company Law Administration (herein in this
section referred to as the Company Law Board)
constituted under sub-section (1) of section 10E of the
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;
and
(c) all proceedings under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of
1956), including proceedings relating to arbitration,
compromise, arrangements and reconstruction and
winding up of companies, pending immediately before
such date before any District Court or High Court, shall
stand transferred to the Tribunal and the Tribunal may
proceed to deal with such proceedings from the stage
before their transfer:
Provided that only such proceedings relating to the
winding up of companies shall be transferred to the
Tribunal that are at a stage as may be prescribed by the
Central Government.
Provided further that only such proceedings relating to
cases other than winding-up, for which orders for
allowing or otherwise of the proceedings are not
CO.PET. 802/2016 Page 4 of 9
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DHIRENDER KUMAR
Signing Date:31.08.2023
16:59:37
reserved by the High Courts shall be transferred to the
Tribunal
[Provided also that]-
(i) all proceedings under the Companies Act, 1956 other
than the cases relating to winding up of companies that
are reserved for orders for allowing or otherwise such
proceedings; or
(ii) the proceedings relating to winding up of companies
which have not been transferred from the High Courts;
shall be dealt with in accordance with provisions of the
Companies Act, 1956 and the Companies (Court) Rules,
1959.]
Provided also that proceedings relating to cases of
voluntary winding up of a company where notice of the
resolution by advertisement has been given under sub-
section (1) of section 485 of the Companies Act, 1956
but 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.”
8. The issue of transfer of winding up petitions to the NCLT has also been
dealt with in the notification dated 7th December, 2016 passed by the Ministry
of Corporate Affairs where, in respect of pending proceedings for winding up,
Rule 5 states as under:-
“ 5. Transfer of pending proceedings of Winding up on
the ground of inability to pay debts. (1) All petitions
relating to winding up under clause (e) of section 433 of
the Act on the ground of inability to pay its debts
pending before a High Court, and where the petition
has not been served on the respondent as required
under rule 26 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959
shall be transferred to the Bench of the Tribunal
established under sub-section (4) of section 419 of the
Act, exercising territorial jurisdiction and such petitions
shall be treated as applications under sections 7, 8 or 9
CO.PET. 802/2016 Page 5 of 9
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DHIRENDER KUMAR
Signing Date:31.08.2023
16:59:37
| of the Code, as the case may be, and dealt with in | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| accordance with Part II of the Code: | ||||||
| Provided that the petitioner shall submit all | ||||||
| information, other than information forming part of the | ||||||
| records transferred in accordance with Rule 7, required | ||||||
| for admission of the petition under Sections 7,8 or 9 of | ||||||
| the Code, as the case may be, including details of the | ||||||
| proposed insolvency professional to the Tribunal within | ||||||
| sixty days from the date of this notification, failing which | ||||||
| the petition shall abate. | ||||||
| Provided that the petitioner shall submit all | ||||||
| information, other than information forming part of the | ||||||
| records transferred in accordance with rule 7, required | ||||||
| for admission of the petition under sections 7,8 or 9 of | ||||||
| the Code, as the case may be, including details of the | ||||||
| proposed insolvency professional to the Tribunal upto | ||||||
| 15th day of July, 2017, failing which the petition shall | ||||||
| stand abated: | ||||||
| Provided further that any party or parties to the | ||||||
| petitions shall, after the 15th day of July, 2017, be | ||||||
| eligible to file fresh applications under sections 7 or 8 | ||||||
| or 9 of the Code, as the case may be, in accordance with | ||||||
| the provisions of the Code: | ||||||
| Provided also that where a petition relating to | ||||||
| winding up of a company is not transferred to the | ||||||
| Tribunal under this rule and remains in the High Court | ||||||
| and where there is another petition under clause (e) of | ||||||
| section 433 of the Act for winding up against the same | ||||||
| company pending as on 15th December, 2016, such | ||||||
| other petition shall not be transferred to the Tribunal, | ||||||
| even if the petition has not been served on the | ||||||
| respondent.” |
in Co. Pet 446/2013 titled Citicorp International Limited v. Shiv-Vani Oil &
Gas Exploration Services Limited wherein the Court observed as under:
CO.PET. 802/2016 Page 6 of 9
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DHIRENDER KUMAR
Signing Date:31.08.2023
16:59:37
“20. As per the proviso highlighted above, upon
the application being filed by any of the parties to the
proceedings, the transfer may be made by the Court in
terms of the second proviso of Section 434 (1) of the
Companies Act, 1956. In Action Ispat (supra), if the
winding up is not at an advanced stage, the High Court
may transfer the matter to the NCLT. The relevant
portion of the said judgement is set out below:
31. Given the aforesaid scheme of winding up
under Chapter XX of the Companies Act,
2013, it is clear that several stages are
contemplated, with the Tribunal retaining the
power to control the proceedings in a winding
up petition even after it is admitted. Thus, in a
winding up proceeding where the petition has
not been served in terms of Rule 26 of the
Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 at a pre-
admission stage, given the beneficial result of
the application of the Code, such winding up
proceeding is compulsorily transferable to the
NCLT to be resolved under the Code. Even
post issue of notice and pre admission, the
same result would ensue. However, post
admission of a winding up petition and after
the assets of the company sought to be
wound up become in custodia legis and are
taken over by the Company Liquidator,
section 290 of the Companies Act, 2013
would indicate that the 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
CO.PET. 802/2016 Page 7 of 9
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DHIRENDER KUMAR
Signing Date:31.08.2023
16:59:37
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 . Whether this stage is
reached would depend upon the facts and
circumstances of each case.”
21. In the present case, the Provisional Liquidator
was appointed in 2017. However, the winding up is not
at an advanced stage. No auction has been conducted,
no claims have been invited. Clearly the winding up
process could consume considerable time. Accordingly,
the present company petition is transferred to the NCLT.
The entire record of the present petition shall also be
remitted in the electronic form to the Registrar, NCLT,
and the same shall be listed before the NCLT. All the
parties appearing before the Court are also permitted to
rd
appear before the NCLT on 3 August, 2023. The OL
shall continue to exercise the control over all the
properties of the Company under liquidation, subject to
any orders that the NCLT may pass in future.
10. A conjoint reading of Rule 5 of the notification dated 7th December,
2016 along with the aforementioned judgment would show that in cases where
the petition is not at an advanced stage, and in cases where the Respondent
has not been served till date, the matter is to be transferred to the NCLT.
th
11. In the present case, notice was issued on 20 October, 2016. However,
the petition is still at a nascent stage and even the liquidator has not been
rd
appointed. Further, as recorded in the order dated 23 August, 2022, the
Respondent company has shifted to a new address and the Petitioner is yet to
ascertain the same. In view thereof, the judgment in Citicorp (supra) would
CO.PET. 802/2016 Page 8 of 9
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DHIRENDER KUMAR
Signing Date:31.08.2023
16:59:37
be squarely applicable in the present case.
12. Applying Section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, Rule 5 of the MCA
th
notification dated 7 December, 2016 and the judgment in Citicorp (supra) ,
the present petition is directed to be transferred to the NCLT.
th
13. Parties to appear before the NCLT on 18 September, 2023.
14. The electronic records of this Court shall be transmitted to the Registrar
NCLT within five working days along with a copy of today's order.
15. The present petition, along with all pending applications, is disposed
of.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE
AUGUST 24, 2023/ mr/sk
CO.PET. 802/2016 Page 9 of 9
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DHIRENDER KUMAR
Signing Date:31.08.2023
16:59:37