1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Company Appeal No.6/2008 IN Company Petition No. 3/2004 M/s Nav Bharat Press (Bhopal) Private Limited Company, Incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its Registered Office at Nav Bharat Bhavan, Cotton Market, Nagpur. APPELLANT VERSUS Nootan Agency, a Registered Partnership Firm, Having its Office at Tilak Statue, Mahal, Nagpur. RESPONDENT - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. A.S. Jaiswal, counsel for the appellant. Mr. Ramesh Darda, counsel for the respondent. CORAM : S.A. BOBDE AND SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 17, 2010. Heard the learned counsel for the parties for some time. 2 Mr. Ramesh Darda, the learned counsel for the respondent/original petitioner, submits that the respondent/original petitioner is willing to withdraw the company petition if the liberty to file a civil suit before the appropriate Court for recovery of the amount claimed in the company petition is granted and the time spent in the Company Court, in prosecuting the winding up petition and the appeal, is excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The learned counsel for the respondent/ Original Petitioner relied on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Maharashtra State Farming Corporation Ltd. Versus Belapur Sugar and Allied Industries Ltd., reported in IV (2005) BC 545 (DB), where the Division Bench granted a time of two months to the claimant to file a suit for the recovery of the amount allegedly due against the company. In the present case, we are of the view that the respondent/original petitioner having pursued winding up petition and appeal before this Court diligently and bona fide, the time taken in the said proceedings needs to be excluded. We accordingly grant two months time to file a 3 suit for recovery of the due amount. The time taken in prosecuting winding up petition and the appeal before this Court shall be excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The Company Petition No.3/2004 is allowed to be withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. Consequently, due to withdrawal of the company petition, the Company Appeal No.6/2008 does not survive and the same is disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE APTE