THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Company Application No.934 of 2005 In Company Petition No.13 of 2002 27th December, 2011 Between :- M/s.Mamatha Chit Fund (P) Ltd., (In Prov.Liqn.) Rep.by the Official Liquidator, ‘High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad .. Applicant And P.Yadaiah and others .. Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Company Application No.934 of 2005 In Company Petition No.13 of 2002 ORDER:- This application has been taken out by the Official Liquidator representing M/s.Mamatha Chit Fund (P) Limited (In Prov.Liqn.) under Section 446 (2)(b) of the Companies Act, 1956 read with Rules 9 and 11 (b) of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 seeking a decree against respondent – P.Yadaiah for Rs.40,000/- with interest thereon at 12% per annum from 7-9-2000 till the date of realization. This Court by an order dated 20-3-2002 passed in C.P.No.13 of 2002 appointed the Official Liquidator attached to this Court as Liquidator of M/s.Mamatha Chit Fund (P) Limited. As per the information furnished in the revised Statement of Affairs by the Ex- Managing Director of the Company (In Prov.Liqn.), the respondent – P.Yadaiah is a prized subscriber in ticket No.23 of chit group No.LP30E and he has to pay an amount of Rs.39,920/- to the Company (In Prov.Liqn.) including a sum of Rs.270/- towards subscription dues and penalty. A notice has been caused to the respondent on 10-4-2003 to pay the amount due. The notice sent to the respondent returned unserved with postal remarks ‘not claimed, returned to sender’. Hence, this application seeking a decree against the respondent – P.Yadaiah. Respondent – P.Yadaiah entered appearance through a Counsel and filed counter. He pleaded in the counter that the Company (In Prov.Liqn.) has not paid the prize amount and that the claim of the applicant is barred by limitation. On behalf of the applicant, one witness was examined and 9 documents were marked. On behalf of the respondent – P.Yadaiah, he got himself examined as R.W.1 and marked one document as Ex.B.1. One K.Narasimha Rao was examined as R.W.2. Pending the application, respondent - P.Yadaiah died and his legal representatives were brought on record as respondents No.2 to 4 as per Orders in C.A.No.2052 of 2007. Respondents No.2 to 4 did not choose to contest the case. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the applicant and perused the evidence of P.W.1, Rws.1 and 2, and Exs.P.1 to P.9 and Ex.B.1. The plea taken by the deceased respondent was that he did not receive the prize amount and therefore there was no obligation on his part to pay the amount claimed by the applicant. He produced Ex.B.1 – memo issued by the Bank. P.Yadaiah while being examined as R.W.1, admits in his cross-examination that Ex.B.1 does not disclose the cheque number stated to have been bounced. He further admits that even after bouncing the cheque on 12-1-2000, he paid balance chit instalments. The very fact of paying the subsequent chit instalments indicates that he received the prize money. Ex.A.2 is the Prized Subscriber Bid Payment Final Statement. As per the statement, deceased Yadaiah received Rs.29,850/- by way of cheque No.-12355 dated 12-1-2000. The evidence of P.W.1 and Exs.A.1 to A.9 amply prove that the deceased Yadaiah received the prize amount of Rs.29,850/- and subsequently he became a defaulter in paying the instalments. Ex.A.4 is the certified true copy of the Chit Prized Chit Ledger Folio in chit No.23 of Chit Group No.LP30E. As per entries therein, P.Yadaiah paid 10 instalments. He committed default in paying the instalments for the remaining 40 months. In that view of the matter, this application is allowed granting a decree against the estate of the deceased (P.Yadaiah) in the hands of respondents No.2 to 4 for Rs.40,000/- with interest at 12% per annum from 7-9-2000 to this day and at 6% per annum from this day till the date of realization. Accordingly, the Company Application is allowed. ________________________ B.Seshasayana Reddy, J 27th December, 2011 smr