-: 1 :- SPB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY PETITION NO. 683 OF 2005 COMPANY PETITION NO. 683 OF 2005 COMPANY PETITION NO. 683 OF 2005 M/s. Hiten Chemicals .. Petitioner. V/s. M/s.Ronilo Pharma Pvt. Ltd., .. Respondent. --- WITH WITH WITH COMPANY PETITION NO. 68 OF 2006 COMPANY PETITION NO. 68 OF 2006 COMPANY PETITION NO. 68 OF 2006 Chetan Rachch .. Petitioner. v/s. M/s.Ronilo Pharma Pvt. Ltd. .. Respondent. --- WITH WITH WITH COMPANY PETITION NO. 702 OF 2006 COMPANY PETITION NO. 702 OF 2006 COMPANY PETITION NO. 702 OF 2006 M/s. Exion Enterprise .. Petitioner. vs. M/s.Ronilo Pharma Pvt.Ltd., .. Respondent. --- WITH WITH WITH COMPANY PETITION N0. 04 OF 2007 COMPANY PETITION N0. 04 OF 2007 COMPANY PETITION N0. 04 OF 2007 Janakalyan Sahakari Bank Ltd. .. Petitioner. vs. M/s. Ronilo Pharma Pvt.Ltd., .. Respondent. --- WITH WITH WITH COMPANY PETITION NO. 651 OF 2007 COMPANY PETITION NO. 651 OF 2007 COMPANY PETITION NO. 651 OF 2007 Amartara Plastics Pvt.Ltd., .. Petitioner. vs. -: 2 :- M/s. Ronilo Pharma Pvt.Ltd. .. Respondent. --- Mr.Simil Purohit i/by Markand Gandhi & Co. for the petitioner in company petition nos. 683/2005. Mr.A.W. Ansari for the petitioner in C.P. no. 68/2006. Mr.R.B.Wadhwani for the petitioner in C.P.No.702/2006. Mr.Ashish Kamath i/by V.Deshpande & Co. for the petitioner in C.P.No.04/2007. Mr.Neel Kumar i/by Kanga & Co. for the petitioner in C.P. 651/2007. --- CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. DATED : 11TH NOVEMBER, 2008. DATED : 11TH NOVEMBER, 2008. DATED : 11TH NOVEMBER, 2008. P.C. : P.C. : P.C. : . All the above petitions can be disposed of together by this common order as the relief claimed in all these petitions is for winding up of the respondent company. 2. In all these petitions, the respective petitioner prays that the respondent company be ordered to be wound up as it is unable to pay its debts. In all five petitions are pending against the respondent company for the said relief. 3. In the leading petition, being company petition no. 683/2005 the outstanding payable by the respondent -: 3 :- company are stated to be Rs. 37,40,098/-, whereas in company petition no. 68/2006 it is Rs.84,871.20/- , in company petition no. 702/2006 it is Rs.11,69,130/-, in company petition no. 04/2007 it is Rs.6,57,697.76/-, and in company petition no. 651/2007 the outstanding dues are Rs. 48,94,752.44/-. 4. Considering the total outstanding dues payable by the respondent company, referred to above, it is more than clear that the respondent company is unable to pay its debts. In each of the petition statutory notice was sent to the respondent company. However, the respondent company has failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues to the concerned petitioner in each of the petition. 5. Insofar as the leading company petition is concerned, the respondent company acknowledged its liability to pay and in fact issued cheques in favour of the petitioners therein. However, the said cheques were dishonoured on account of insufficient funds. The respondent company made no attempts to remedy the same or to offer the amount at any subsequent point of time. There is nothing on record to indicate that the respondent company has made any sincere attempts to settle the outstanding dues of any of the petitioners. -: 4 :- 6. As aforesaid, inspite of the statutory notice, the respondent company has failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues; and even during the pendency of these petitions, the respondent company has not bother to pay any amount to any of the petitioner, the respondent company deserves to be wound up. 7. None appears for the respondent company though duly served. It is brought to my notice that in the leading company petition, after the order was passed for admitting the petition, the respondent company moved for recalling that order, which application came to be dismissed for non-prosecution on 9th of March,2007. No steps have been taken by the respondent company thereafter either for restoration of the said application or for that matter to discharge its liability towards each of the petitioner referred to above. 8. As observed earlier, considering the substantial outstanding dues payable by the respondent company it necessarily follows that the respondent company is unable to pay the same. Therefore, I have no hesitation in allowing all these petition and ordering the winding up of the respondent company. Accordingly, the respondent company is ordered to be wound up forthwith. The Official Liquidator shall take over the assets and -: 5 :- properties of the respondent company forthwith and proceed in accordance with law. (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J).