1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.4028 OF 2011. M/s Nav Bharat Press ..vs.. The Registrar of Companies, Under the Indian Companies, Mumbai. =-=-==-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Mr. A.S.Jaiswal Adv. for the petitioner. Mr. S.K.Misahra, Adv. for the respondent. C ORAM : D.D.SINHA AND A.P.BHANGALE, JJ. DATED : 9th NOVEMBER, 2011. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that Company Petition No.3 of 2004 was filed by M/s Nootan Agency, Nagpur and this court vide order dated 3/4/2008 admitted the same and the respondent (present petitioner) was directed to wind up the company under Chapter II of the Companies Act, 1956. Being aggrieved by the same, appeal was preferred by the present petitioner bearing Company Appeal No.6 of 2008 and before the Division Bench, the learned counsel for the respondent – M/s Nootan Agency has made a statement that company petition itself will be withdrawn if the liberty is granted to file a suit. The Division Bench of this court vide order dated 17/2/2010 permitted the respondent M/s Nootan Agency to withdraw the company petition and also granted two 2 months time to file suit for necessary claims against the present petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner, on the backdrop of the above referred facts, has submitted that neither the company petition nor the Company Appeal is pending before this court and permission is already granted to the respondent – Nootan Agency to file a suit for necessary claims, if any. It is in this circumstance, the order impugned dated 1/7/2011 passed by the Registrar of the Company looses its efficacy. Mr.Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent, has submitted that since the petitioner failed to place on record of the Registrar the order passed by this court in Company Appeal within a stipulated period, the impugned order came to be passed. In view of the above referred undisputed facts, it is evident that the company petition was permitted to withdraw with liberty to the respondent M/s Nootan Agency to file regular civil suit for claims, if any. It is no doubt true that the petitioner failed to place on record the orders passed by this court within a stipulated period before the Registrar of the Company. However, it is not in dispute that those orders at later point of time were placed on record of the Registrar of the company. In that view of the matter, delay, if any, caused in filing those orders is condoned and the Registrar of the Company should take appropriate steps accordingly. With the above direction, writ petition is disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE. chute 3