- (1.) THE company throws a preliminary challenge to the creditor's application for winding up being received. The statutory notice, the company says, was not issued to its registered office and, thus, the legal fiction in section 434 (1) (a) of the Companies Act, 1956 would not work in favour of the petitioner. The company also makes out a case in defence of the claim and urges that in the unlikely event of the creditor's petition being found maintainable, it should not be admitted by virtue of the substantial defence that the company sets up.
(2.) THE petitioner claims a sum of Euro 3916. 47 to be due from the company and suggests that the company's reluctance to pay the Indian equivalent thereof despite receipt of the statutory notice warrants this petition being received and the company being ultimately sent into liquidation. The petitioner is incorporated in Singapore and claims to be part of the SKF group of concerns, headquartered in Sweden but having substantial operations in the manufacture and supply of bearings in India. The petitioner relies on an agreement of february 14, 2003 that was entered into on behalf of the SKF concerns through skf Bearings India Limited with the company for supply and import of SKF products. The petitioner has relied on three invoices, all of December, 2003 for euro 1153. 52, Euro 2309. 69 and Euro 453. 26 for a combined claim that translates to a little over Rs. 2. 20 lakh at the present rate of exchange.
(3.) THE statutory notice of February 15, 2005 was addressed to the company at its Marshall House address in Calcutta but the room or office number was indicated as 407. In the notice and the cause-title to the petition, the registered office of the company has been indicated to be at 407, Marshall House; 25, strand Road, Kolkata-700 001. The petitioner relied on the agreement of february 14, 2003 in the statutory notice and claimed that it exported goods to the company thereunder and that a principal sum of Euro 3916. 47 remained due. The company responded by a letter of March 7, 2005, The company's response was to two SKF entities that had issued separate notices through the same Advocate claiming from the company. It is necessary to see how the company's Advocates described their clients in the reply of March 7, 2005: "our clients: 1) Premier (India) Bearings Limited 407, Marshal House, 25, Strand Road, Kolkata- 700001. 2) Hitech Bearings Pvt. Limited 407, Marshal House, 25, Strand Road, Kolkata-700001. ";