IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA COMPANY PETITION NO. 17 OF 2009 MRS. NALAJALA SUNITHA ... Petitioner Versus PRIMESLOTS PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED ... Respondent Mr. Amey Kakodkar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Coram:- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. Date:- 29th April, 2011 P.C.:- This Company Petition for winding up was placed before this Court for admission, from time to time, and the Court was informed that the parties are trying to resolve the dispute amicably. 2. The dispute in the Company Petition is about repayment of money which has been lent and advanced by cheques, as more particularly set out in the Petition. It is the case of the Petitioner that the amount having not been repaid within 21 days from the date of receipt of the statutory notice and also the company failing to compound or secure the debts otherwise, this petition was filed. 3. During the course of negotiations, parties have arrived at an overall settlement not only as regards the disputes in this Petition, but various other issues pending for resolution. There were other proceedings, namely, a Special Civil Suit and proceedings before the Company Law Board. Now, the Consent Terms are tendered, fully settling and compromising all disputes. 4. The Petitioner is present in the Court and she confirms that the Consent Terms fully record the understanding and arrangement between the parties. Equally, the Director of the Respondent Company is present and he confirms that the understanding and agreement, as recorded, is accepted by the Respondent and he is duly authorised to sign and execute the terms. 5. It is stated in the Terms that the Respondent will accept all the obligations and agreements between the parties and in lieu thereof, another company called M/s. Primeslots Real Estates Private Ltd., which is a sister concern of the Respondent, has agreed to admit the Petitioner as 25 % shareholder by allotting to her 250 equity shares of a face value of Rs.100/-. That would make her shareholder to the extent of 25% in the said Company. 6. The sister concern has also appended its signature to these Consent Terms and has fully accepted the agreement arrived at between the parties. Necessary resolutions have been passed by the Board of both the Companies. Further, the Petitioner has agreed to withdraw the Special Civil Suit and even the Company Petition, pending before the Company Law Board, at Mumbai. 7. In the light of the fact that both sides have amicably discussed and negotiated for an overall settlement and the terms being not contrary to law, so also public policy, there is no impediment in taking them on record. Accordingly, the Consent Terms, duly signed by parties, are taken on record in their presence and marked "X" for identification. There will be an order in terms of these Consent Terms. 8. The Company Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn, with no order as to costs. S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. ssm.