1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2013
  6. /
  7. January

Vanadoulat Patil & vs Gujarat Industrial Trucks

High Court Of Gujarat|26 September, 2013
1. Present Company Petition is listed in the cause list for final hearing.
2. At the time of hearing, it is informed that present petition came to be admitted vide order dated 24.6.2009 and direction for publication of notice of final hearing was passed under the same order dated 24.6.2009.
2.1 Any material to show that the publication of Notice of final hearing was made in pursuance of the said order dated 24.6.2009 is not available on record however, Mr. Japee, learned advocate for the respondent submitted that according to his information the notice about final disposal of the petition was duly published.
2.2 From the order dated 24.6.2009, it transpires that the Court had differed order appointing provisional liquidator and opportunity to the petitioners to move appropriate application after having publication of advertisement was reserved.
2.3 Further, there is nothing on record to show that subsequently any order appointing OL is passed or not.
2.4 However it is also not clear as to whether any advertisement inviting claims has been issued / published and any response are received or not.
2.5 From the record it does not become clear as to whether the petitioners had taken out separate application seeking order of appointment or not.
2.6 It also transpires from the record that until now the proceedings have been adjourned on the ground that OJ. Appeal involving issue about maintainability of winding up petition by workers is pending before the Division Bench however, it is not clear as to whether the said OJ Appeal is decided or not.
3. Under the circumstances, at the request of learned advocate for the petitioners, hearing is adjourned with the clarification that the petitioners shall place on record the details as to whether advertisement of notice of final hearing was published or not and if it was published whether affidavit of publication is filed or not.
4. If such affidavit is not filed, the petitioners will take necessary steps.
5. It will also be clarified by the petitioner as to whether subsequently any separate application in pursuance of the order dated 24.6.2009 seeking appointment of provisional liquidator was taken out or not or whether any other order appointing provisional liquidator has been passed or not.
6. The position as regards the assets of the property of the company will also be placed on record.
The petitioners and respondent shall verify and confirm as to whether the OJ Appeal has been decided or not.
For the said purpose hearing is adjourned to 9.10.2013.
(K.M.THAKER, J.) Suresh* 4
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.