:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY PETITION NO. 413 OF 2008 COMPANY PETITION NO. 413 OF 2008 COMPANY PETITION NO. 413 OF 2008 Dhirajlal J.Sanghvi (H.U.F.) ..Petitioner Proprietor of M/s. K. D. Sanghvi & Co. versus M/s. Speciality Polymers Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent Mr. Sunil Chaturvedi for the Petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Bhagwat i/b. H. H. Nagi for the Respondent. CORAM : S. A. BOBDE, J. CORAM : S. A. BOBDE, J. CORAM : S. A. BOBDE, J. DATE : 22ND AUGUST, 2008. DATE : 22ND AUGUST, 2008. DATE : 22ND AUGUST, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. . . . Heard. 2. In this petition under Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, the petitioner has claimed a sum of Rs.7,48,800/- against the respondent company for goods delivered under invoice No. 665 dated 2.5.2005. There is no dispute about delivery of the goods. 3. The petitioner served statutory notice dated :2: 13.12.2007. There is no reply to the statutory notice. Before this court the defence of the company is two fold. Firstly that the goods are defective and secondly that the amount of Rs.7,48,800/- is not due since the respondent company paid a sum of Rs.2,97,673/- to Jamnadas & Co. who at the relevant time was / is the sister concern of the petitioner company. 4. The defence does not appear to be substantial or bonafide. There is no contemporaneous correspondence questioning the quality of goods supplied by the petitioner. The defence that some payment is made to Jamnadas & Co. is vague. The respondent company has not stated who gave instructions to make payment to Jamnadas & Co. and how Jamnadas & Co. was / is the sister concern of the petitioner company. The averment is that Jamnadas & Co. "at the relevant time was/is sister concern of the petitioner company". 5. Having regard to the fact that there is no reply to the statutory notice and absence of material in support, the defence does not appear to be bonafide. :3: 6. In the circumstances, the respondents are directed to deposit a sum of Rs.7,48,800/- before the Prothonotary & Senior Master of this Court within a period of eight weeks from today, failing which the Company Petition shall stand admitted and the petitioner shall advertise the petition in two local newspapers, viz., "Free Press Journal", "Maharashtra Times" and in the Maharashtra Government Gazette. The petitioner shall deposit an amount of Rs.10,000/- with the Prothonotary and Senior Master towards the publication charges within three weeks from the date of default with an intimation to the Company Registrar, failing which the petition shall stand dismissed for non-prosecution. 7. In case the said amount is so deposited as directed hereinabove, the Company Petition shall stand dismissed and the petitioner may file a suit within a period of four weeks from the date of the communication by the Advocate for the respondent to the Advocate for the petitioner that the money is deposited. If such a suit is filed, then the deposit will go to the credit of the said suit. The Prothonotary and Senior Master, High Court, Bombay, to invest the said amount in Fixed Deposit of any :4: Nationalised Bank for a period of three years initially and to renew the same from time to time till further orders. In the event the suit is not filed within the stipulated period, the respondent company will be at liberty to withdraw the amount after the expiry of the aforesaid period. (S. A. BOBDE, J.) (S. A. BOBDE, J.) (S. A. BOBDE, J.)