THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Company Application No.1 of 2010 in Company Petition No.173 of 2001 Dated:11th June, 2010 Between: M/s.Monarch Finlease Limited (in liquidation) rep. by the Official Liquidator, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. ….Applicant AND 1.Sri U.M.Girishankar & Anr. …Respondents **** THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Company Application No.1 of 2010 in Company Petition No.173 of 2001 ORDER: This company application has been taken out by applicant M/s.Monarch Finlease Limited (in liquidation) represented by the Official Liquidator under Section 446(2)(b) of the Companies Act, 1956 read with Rules 9 and 11(b) of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, seeking a decree against the respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally for a sum of Rs.9,286/- along with interest @ 36% p.a. w.e.f. 14.06.2001 till the date of realisation. 2. By order dated 12.02.2002 made in Company Petition No.173 of 2001, this Court appointed the Official Liquidator as Provisional Liquidator of M/s.Monarch Finlease Limited. By a subsequent order dated 01.11.2006, this Court ordered for winding up of M/s.Monarch Finlease Limited and appointed the Official Liquidator as its liquidator. As per the available records of the company (in liquidation), the 1st respondent availed finance facility of Rs.32,000/- for purchasing Hero Honda Splendor. The 2nd respondent stood as a guarantor to the 1st respondent. The loan amount was to be paid in 12 monthly instalments at the rate of Rs.3,120/- per month. The 1st respondent paid a sum of Rs.28,080/- towards 9 hire instalments in full and a further sum of Rs.74/- towards part of 10th hire instalment aggregating to Rs.28,154/- leaving a balance of Rs.9,286/-. As per the information in the loans and advances register, the 1st respondent is due a sum of Rs.9,286/- to the company (in liquidation). The Official Liquidator issued a notice dated 12.07.2002 requiring the 1st respondent to remit an amount of Rs.11,797/-. The notice sent to the 1st respondent returned unserved. Hence, this Company Application seeking a decree against the respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally. 3. Notice to the respondents 1 and 2 came to be ordered on 21.01.2010. Notice sent to the 2nd respondent returned with an endorsement ‘unclaimed’. Whereas, notice sent to the 1st respondent returned unserved for want of correct address. The applicant filed C.A.No.198 of 2010 seeking permission to take out notice to the 1st respondent by way of substitute service. The said application came to be allowed on 31.03.2010, permitting the applicant to take out notice to the 1st respondent by way of publication in ‘Kannada Prabha’ daily newspaper in Davanegere local edition. The applicant took out publication and filed proof of service. The respondents did not choose to enter appearance to resist the application. 4. Affidavit of Mr.R.Rama Krishna Reddy in lieu of chief-examination, along with 16 documents, has been placed on record. The documents have been marked as Exs.A1 to A16. 5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the official liquidator and perused the evidence of PW.1 and Exs.A1 to A16. 6. The 1st respondent availed a loan from the applicant company (in liquidation), for purchasing a twowheeler. He executed Ex.A1 hire purchase agreement. The 2nd respondent stood as a guarantor for the loan availed by the 1st respondent. Both the respondents executed a demand promissory note. As per the hire purchase register maintained by the applicant company (in liquidation), the 1st respondent made part payments leaving a balance of Rs.9,286/-. Ex.A11 is the true copy of the hire purchase register. As per the provisional and unaudited list of loans and advances (hire purchase accounts) as on 12.02.2002, the 1st respondent has to pay a sum of Rs.9,286/-. Ex.A12 is the true copy of the provisional and un-audited list of loans and advances (hire purchase accounts) as on 12.02.2002. The evidence of PW.1 and the documents placed on record amply prove the claim of the applicant Company (in liquidation) against the respondents 1 and 2. 7. Accordingly, the Company Application is allowed with costs and there shall be a decree in favour of the applicant Company and against the respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally for a sum of Rs.9,286/- with interest @ 18% p.a. w.e.f. 14.06.2001 to the date of decree and thereafter @ 12% p.a. till the date of realization. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:11th June, 2010. cs THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Company Application No.1 of 2010 in Company Petition No.173 of 2001 Dated:11th June, 2010