THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Company Application No.342 2011 Date:11th July, 2011 Between: M/s. Mamatha Chit Fund (P) Ltd. (in provisional liquidation) Rep. by the Official Liquidator, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. …Applicant and 1. Sri T.Samay Singh & Ors. …Respondents *** THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Company Application No.342 of 2011 ORDER: This Company Application has been taken out by the Official Liquidator representing M/s.Mamatha Chit Fund (P) Ltd. (in provisional liquidation) under Section 446(2)(b) of the Companies Act, 1956 r/w. Rules 9 and 11(b) of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, seeking a decree against the respondents jointly and severally for a sum of Rs.4,000/- with interest @ 12% p.a. w.e.f. 21.05.2000 till the date of realisation. 2. By order, dated 20.03.2002, passed in Company Petition No.13 of 2002, the Official Liquidator attached to this Court was appointed as provisional liquidator of M/s.Mamatha Chit Fund (P) Ltd., (in provisional liquidation). As per the records of the Company (in provisional liquidation), the 1st respondent herein joined in the chit group No.LP7F with ticket No.05 conducted by the Company (in provisional liquidation). The value of the chit is Rs.1,00,000/- with a duration of 50 months at the rate of Rs.2,000/- per month each. The 1st respondent became the prized subscriber and received an amount of Rs.55,875/- against the bid amount of Rs.60,000/- vide cheque bearing No.412838, dated 08.11.1996. He paid 48 instalments and committed default in payment of the last two instalments. The respondents 2 to 4 stood as sureties to the 1st respondent in respect of the prized chit amount. The Official Liquidator issued a notice, dated 29.04.2003, calling upon the 1st respondent to pay an amount of Rs.4,979.80 ps. shown as due in the list of debtors forming part of statement of affairs. The 1st respondent despite receipt of notice, neither disputed the liability nor paid the amount due. Hence, this Company Application by the Official Liquidator seeking a decree against the respondents as stated supra. 3. Notice to the respondents came to be ordered on 28.03.2011. The 1st respondent received the notice. He did not choose to enter appearance either in person or through a counsel to resist the claim of the applicant. Notice sent to the 2nd respondent returned un-served with an endorsement ‘addressee not claimed’. Therefore, notice sent to the 2nd respondent is deemed to have been served. Learned counsel appearing for the Official Liquidator reports that the applicant is not pressing the claim against the respondents 3 and 4. Accordingly, the claim against the respondents 3 and 4 is dismissed as not pressed. 4. The applicant filed affidavit of Mr.R.Ramakrishna Reddy, in lieu of chief-examination, and produced 18 documents, which have been marked as Exs.A1 to A18. 5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Official Liquidator and perused the affidavit of Mr.R.Ramakrishna Reddy and Exs.A1 to A18. 6. As per Ex.A6 certified true copy of the prized subscriber bid payment final statement signed by the 1st respondent, the 1st respondent received an amount of Rs.55,875/- against the bid amount of Rs.68,990/-. The respondents 2 to 4 stood as guarantors to the first respondent in respect of the prized chit. Ex.A2 is the certified copy of the agreement of guarantee executed by the respondents 2 to 4. As per Ex.A11 certified true copy of the chit ledger folio in T.No.05, Group No.LP7F, the 1st respondent paid 48 instalments and committed default in payment of last two instalments. The evidence of PW.1 and the documents placed on record, which have been marked as Exs.A1 to A18, substantiated the claim of the applicant against the respondents 1 and 2. 7. Accordingly, the Company Application is partly allowed with costs granting a decree in favour of the applicant and against the respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally for a sum of Rs.4,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. w.e.f. 21.05.2000 to this day and at the rate of 6% p.a. from this day to the date of realisation. The Company Application against the respondents 3 and 4 is dismissed as not pressed. _____________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J Date:11th July, 2011. cs THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Company Application No.342 of 2011 Date :11th July, 2011