1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. COMPANY PETITION NO.929 OF 2003 M/s. Sagar Steel Corporation ..Petitioner. V/s. (No R & P) WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.9 OF 2004 M/s. Freightwings & Travels Ltd. ..Petitioner. V/s. M/s. International Clothing India Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.114 OF 2004 Fiat India Pvt. Ltd. ..Petitioner. V/s. Fiat India Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.161 OF 2004 M/s. Kirloskar Investment and Finance Ltd. ..Petitioner. V/s. Singhal Swaroop Ispat Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.169 OF 2004 Pramod S. Tibrewals ..Petitioner. V/s. Vam Steel Udyog Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.180 OF 2004 Dattaji G. Zavare-Patil ..Petitioner. V/s. 2 Urja Techniques (I) P. Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.217 OF 2004 Sunil Synchem Ltd. ..Petitioner. Vs. M/s. Asoj Soft Caps. Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.327 OF 2004 M/s. Kirloskar Investment and Finance Ltd. ..Petitioner. Vs. M/s. Eastern Overseas Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.328 OF 2004 Mayankbhai R. Patel ..Petitioner. Vs. M/s. S. Kumars. Com Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.422 OF 2004 M/s. Kirloskar Investment & Finance Ltd. ..Petitioner. Vs. M/s. Global Infrastructure & Technologies ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.424 OF 2004 Prabha P. Shenai ..Petitioner. Vs. Shakti Acquaculture Farms Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.425 OF 2004 Bakulesh R. Dalal ..Petitioner. Vs. Grauer & Weil (I) Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.426 OF 2004 3 Surat Goods Transport Service ..Petitioner. Vs. Roofit Inds. Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.428 OF 2004 M/s. Kirloskar Investments & Finance Ltd. ..Petitioner. Vs. M/s. Jord Engineers India Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.435 OF 2004 Kaluchand Bokadia ..Petitioner. Vs. M/s. Pittie Solar Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.436 OF 2004 Kahichand Bokadia .. Petitioner. Vs. Bhaskar Urjatech P. Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.437 OF 2004 Prabha P. Shenal ..Petitioner. Vs. Crown Maritime Co. (India) Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.439 OF 2004 Castrol India Limited ..Petitioner. Vs. Precision Fastners Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.440 OF 2004 4 Tata International Ltd. ..Petitioner. Vs. Futuristic Offshore Services & Chemical Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.441 OF 2004 M/s. Pudumji Pulp Paper Mills Ltd. ..Petitioner. Vs. Shri Multi Media Vision Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.443 OF 2004 M/s. Vantage Advertising Ltd. ..Petitioner. Vs. M/s. Golden Palms SPA & Resorts Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.444 OF 2004 Bhawani Indentors Pvt. Ltd. ..Petitioner. Vs. M/s. Kogta Import Export Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.454 OF 2004 Devraj Sanghvi ..Petitioner. Vs. M/s. GMP Systech Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.555 OF 2004 M/s. Kirloskar Investment & Finance Ltd. ..Petitioner. Vs. Kanchan Capsules Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.556 OF 2004 Devraj Sanghvi M/s. Shree Steel ..Petitioner. 5 Vs. M/s. Altcom Technologies Ltd. ..Respondent. WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.574 OF 2004 Pratibha Precast Concrete Industries Pvt. Ltd. ..Petitioner. Vs. (No R & P) ... None present. CORAM: DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. 5th June, 2007. P.C. : This batch of matters has been placed for directions before the Court. The Company Registrar has informed the Court that the proceedings are not traceable and in all probabilities the parties have lost interest in pursuing the proceedings. None of the advocates appearing on behalf of the contesting parties are present. In these circumstances, it would be appropriate to pass the following order : i) The Company Petitions are dismissed for want of prosecution; 6 ii) In the event that any of the Petitioners are interested in pursuing the proceedings arising out of the Company Petitions, the learned advocates concerned shall within a period of two weeks inform the Company Registrar and take steps within a period of four weeks thereafter for reconstructing the record. In that event, the Company Registrar shall place the concerned Petitions before the Court for further directions; iii) In the event that any of the companies who are Respondents to the proceedings have already been wound up, the Petitioners would be at liberty to pursue their claims in liquidation.