1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY APPLICATION NO.442 OF 2000 IN COMPANY PETITION NO.125 OF 1999 Ion Exchange Envirofarms Ltd. .. Applicant Vs. The OL, of M/s.Colour Cartons Ltd. (In Prov.Liqn.) .. Respondent Mr.C.N.Mehta for applicant. Ms.K.C.Nichani for respondent. WITH COMPANY APPLICATION NO.878 OF 2008 IN COMPANY PETITION NO.125 OF 1999 M/s.Jardine Henderson .. Applicant Vs. The OL, of M/s.Colour Cartons Ltd. (In Prov.Liqn.) & Anr. .. Respondents Ms K.C.Nichani for applicant. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 04th July 2008 P.C. . The applicant claims to be the landlord of the premises in a part of which the company in liquidation was inducted as a tenant. 2 2. It is the case of the applicant landlord that the representative of the OL took possession of these premises, which are more particularly described in para 5 of the affidavit in support of this application, on 04th November, 1999. Thereafter, the premises are locked and completely unused. Apart from contending that the said premises do not constitute an asset of the company in winding up, additionally, it is contended that the liquidator does not require the premises for carrying on business of the company in winding up nor does he require the premises for beneficial and proper use during winding up operations. The Company Application is filed in the year 2000 and is pending since then. 3. I have refused the adjournment to the parties particularly on the ground that there is no denial of the factual position that the premises are unused. Matter appeared before me on 06th June, 2008 and was adjourned. It appeared yesterday and I had orally directed the 3 Dy.O.L. present in the Court to take instructions. 4. After seeking instructions, the OL makes a statement that he does not dispute the factual position and would therefore handover vacant and peaceful possession of the premises to the applicant Ion Exchange Enviro Farms Ltd., within a period of two weeks from today. 5. Alongwith this Company Application, Company Application No.878 of 2008 was also placed. That Application is by M/s.Jardine Henderson. It claims to be a subtenant in part of the premises which are covered by Company Application No.442 of 2000. It also claims to have filed a suit in the Court of Small Causes, Bombay being R.A.D Suit No.2869 of 2000 for declaration that they are lawful subtenants in respect of the premises which are more particularly described in Company Application No.878 of 2000. 4 6. After this matter was argued for sometime, Mr.Mehta appearing for Ion Exchange Enviro Farm Ltd. (landlord) and Ms.Nichani appearing for M/s. Jardine Henderson informed the Court that they had mutually agreed to resolve the dispute in the pending proceedings. It is agreed between the parties that after the OL hands over the possession to the M/s.Ion Exchange Enviro Farm Ltd., it will either allow M/s.Jardine Henderson to occupy a portion of the same on such terms as are agreed between the parties or M/s.Jardine Henderson will be provided with the alternate accommodation by the landlord. Thereafter, the terms of occupation between them would be determined independently. 7. In the light of these statements and agreements, Company Application No.878 of 2000 is adjourned to 10th July, 2008 for filing consent terms. (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J)