THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY COMPANY APPLICATION No.754 of 2010 (Dated : 20-09-2011) Between: M/s. Monarch Finlease Limited ( In Liqn.) Rep by the Official Liquidator, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. ….…Applicant. A n d Smt. Manjula R.E., Bangalore and others. ….…Respondents. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY COMPANY APPLICATION No.754 of 2010 ORDER: 1. This application has been taken out under Section 446 (2) (b) of Companies Act, 1956 read with Rules 9 & 11 (b) of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 seeking a decree against the respondents jointly and severally for a sum of Rs.45,000/- along with interest at the rate of 36% per annum with effect from 02-08-2001 till the date of realization. 2. This Court, by an order dated 12-02-2002 made in C.P.No.173 of 2001 appointed the Official Liquidator attached to this Court as Provisional Liquidator of M/s.Monarch Finlease Limited. Subsequently, by an order dated 01-11-2006, M/s.Monacrch Finlease Limited was directed to wound up. The Official Liquidator took charge of the affairs and assets of the company in liquidation. As per the records available with the Official Liquidator, the 1st respondent availed loan facility of Rs.1,00,000/- for purchase of Cassette Copier. She agreed to pay Rs.285/- per day and clear the loan amount within a period of 1 ½ year. She paid an amount of Rs.82,008/- during the period from 03-11-1999 to 02-08-2001. Respondents 2 & 3 stood as guarantors for the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent herein committed default in paying a sum of Rs.45,000/- as on 15-12-2005. The Official Liquidator issued notice to the respondents 1 & 2, demanding them to pay the balance amount of Rs.45,000/-. The Notices sent to the respondents 1 & 2 returned unserved with an endorsement “left and no such number”. The Official Liquidator issued a second notice dated 22.3.2010 to the respondents 1 to 3. Notice sent to the respondents 1 & 2 returned unserved with an endorsement “not claimed”. Notice sent to the Respondent No.3 returned unserved with an endorsement “no such person in the address”. The 1st respondent issued a reply notice dated 02-07-2010 pleading discharge of the amount during May, 2001. It is also contended by the 1st respondent in the reply notice that he deposited NSC certificate worth Rs.18,000/- as security with the company in liquidation. Thereupon, the Official Liquidator under letter dated 05-8-2010 directed the 1st respondent to produce the necessary document for proof of payment of the entire amount and also the details of NSC certificate stated to have been deposited with the company in liquidation. Notice sent to the 1st respondent returned unserved with postal remarks “not claimed”. Hence this application. 3. Notice to the respondents came to be ordered on 28-09-2010. Notice sent to the 1st respondent returned unserved with an endorsement “addressee not claimed”. Notice sent to the 3rd respondent has been served. The applicant withdrew the claim against the 2nd respondent and accordingly, the claim against the 2nd respondent came to be dismissed as withdrawn on 24-11-2010. The 1st respondent entered appearance through a counsel and filed counter. 4. It is stated in the counter that the 1st respondent cleared the entire amount and she deposited the NSC certificates as a security for the loan and that she is entitled for return of the NSC certificate worth Rs.72,000/-. Though, the 1st respondent filed counter, she did not choose to participate in the proceedings. On behalf of the applicant, one witness was examined as P.W.1 and 31 documents were marked as Exs.A1 to A31. 5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Official Liquidator representing the Company in liquidation-applicant and perused the evidence of P.W.1 and Exs.A1 to A31. 6. Ex.A5 is the sanction letter dated 10-08-1999 issued by the Company to the 1st respondent. Ex.A9 is the Hire Purchase Agreement, dated 18-08-1999 executed by the respondents in favour of the company in liquidation. Ex.A10-Demand Promissory Notice, dated 10-08-1999, executed by the 1st respondent in favour of the company in liquidation. Ex.A18 is the certified true copy of the page No.27 Hire Purchase Register maintained by the company in liquidation. As per the entries in Ex.A18, the 1st respondent paid Rs.82,008/- leaving a balance of Rs.45,000/-. The evidence of P.W.1 and Exs.A1 to A31 substantiate the claim of the applicant against the respondents 1 & 3. 7. Accordingly, the Company Application is allowed in part granting a decree in favour of the applicant and against the respondents for Rs.45,000/- with interest at 12% per annum from 02- 08-2001 to this day and from 6% to the date of the payment. No costs. ______________________________ B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, J Date:20.9.2011 mrb