IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Company Appeal No. 5 of 2011. Date of Decision : July _29_ , 2011 Ms. Puneet Brar and another Appellants Versus M/s. Tigaksha Metallics Pvt. Ltd. and another Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the appellants : Mr. Anuj Nag, Advocate, for the appellants. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. (Oral) This appeal is directed against the order dated 29.4.2011 passed in Company Petition No. 3 of 2011 whereby the Company Petition filed by the petitioners herein has been dismissed by the learned Company Judge in limine without even issuing notice to the Company. 2. The allegation of the appellants (hereinafter referred to as the petitioners) is that they had rented out House No. 609, Sector 16-D, Chandigarh to the Company at a rent of ` 59,000/- per Whether reports of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 month. It was alleged that the Company after June, 2010 has not paid any amount and even prior to that there is some shortfall in the payments. Notice was issued by the petitioners calling upon the Company to pay the balance amount under Section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 but the Company did not respond to this notice. It is argued that since the Company did not respond to the notice there is a presumption that the Company is unable to pay its debts. 3. The learned Company Judge came to the conclusion that the dispute between the parties was purely a rent dispute and the petitioners had an effective and efficacious remedy of filing proceedings for eviction of the tenant under the Rent Control Act or for recovery of the amount by filing a suit at Chandigarh and this was not a fit case where notices should be issued to the Company. 4. We have perused the file of the Company Petition and find that the petitioners have not even cared to annex the balance sheets of the Company. How can this Court presume that the Company is unable to pay off its debt when the petitioners have not filed the balance sheets or any other document on record to show that the Company is unable to pay its debt? Merely because the Company has not replied to the notice, is no reason to either wind up the Company or to issue notice. Even issuance of notice for winding up of the Company can cause havoc to the Company. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the learned Company 3 Judge was justified in dismissing the petition in limine. The appeal is also dismissed in limine. (Justice Deepak Gupta), Judge. (Justice Sanjay Karol), Judge. July _29_, 2011 (PK)