In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh CAPP No. 38 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: September 8, 2009 Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited …Appellant Versus M/s Punjab National Fertilisers & Chemicals Limited and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. B.S. Walia, Advocate, for the appellant. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. The instant appeal filed under Section 483 of the Companies Act, 1956, is directed against order dated 15.5.2009 passed by the learned Company Judge in C.P. No. 5 of 2003 in C.P. No. 71 of 2000. Learned Company Judge vide his detailed order has allowed the expenses of the security agencies for the watch and ward, which were duly empanelled. Learned Company Judge has also discussed the terms of initial engagement of security services and also listed the reasons for accumulation of un-paid claims. He has also noticed that in the absence of timely checking at the site of the factories, where the services of watch and ward staff belonging to the security agencies had been requisitioned, it was not possible to decline the claim made by them. Learned Company Judge has also issued guidelines to be followed for future. CAPP No. 38 of 2009 Having heard learned counsel for the appellant at some length we find that no meaningful argument has been advanced warranting admission of the appeal. The dues of the security agencies have been pending for the last number of years and the secured creditor like the appellant have been deferring the payment on one pretext or the other. The learned Company Judge has dealt with the objections and rejected the same by recording the reason that objections of general nature were raised to dispute their claim, which could not be justified in the absence of any details relating to the payment of Provident Fund and ESI contributions. Learned Company Judge has opined that it would be un-realistic to deduce that they are dis-entitled because of the fact that they have not been paid Provident Fund or ESI. He has further opined that the secured creditor and the Official Liquidator have to blame themselves for not attending to the claims of the security agencies with efficiency which they are bound to impress upon on their own actions. As a sequel to the above discussion we see no ground to interfere with the order passed by the learned Company Judge warranting admission of the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed. In view of the fact that the appeal has been dismissed on merit, no orders are required to be passed on the miscellaneous applications for exemption as also the application seeking condonation of delay of 53 days in filing the appeal. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (JASWANT SINGH) 2 CAPP No. 38 of 2009 September 8, 2009 JUDGE Pkapoor 3