1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY PETITION NO.17 OF 2009 WITH COMPANY APPLICATION NO.501 OF 2009 Travel Voyages (I) Pvt.Ltd. ..Petitioner. v/s. CHR Global (HR Services) Pvt.Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr.Ranbir Krishan i/b. M/s. Singhania & Co. for petitioner. Ms. Neeta Solanki a/w Kishor Maru i/b. Kiran Jain & Co. for Respondent. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR, J DATED :- JULY 2, 2009. P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. Preliminary objection regarding maintainability of this Petition is raised by the Respondent on the assertion that Registered Office of the Respondent Company is at 31 Shakespeare, Kolkata, West Bengal. To substantiate that fact, the Respondent relies on form-18, which is appended to the reply affidavit at Exh.1. The said form discloses that the registered 2 address of the Respondent company is at Kolkata. If it is so, this Court has no jurisdiction to try and decide the present action against the Respondent company. Counsel for the Petitioner however, submits that the Petitioner was misled because of the letter head issued by the Respondent Company, which indicates office address of the Respondent company at Mumbai. I find force in this submission. If it is so, the Respondent is obliged to compensate the Petitioner for having created confusion on account of the address printed on the letter head, which was used to send communication dated 16th July, 2008 and other correspondence. 3. To get over this position, Counsel for the Respondent has placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the case of N.L.Mehta Cinema Enterprises (P) Ltd. vs. Pravinchandra P.Mehta reported in (1991) Vol.70 Comp. Cases 31(Bom.) and unreported Order dated 16 th September, 2005 in CP No.237 of 2005 in the case of M/s.Maingi Maritime Consultant Pvt.Ltd.vs. M/s.Sunder’s Underwater Services Pvt.Ltd., wherein this Court has taken the view that the grievance regarding incorrect registered office address furnished by the Company in contravention of Section 147(1c) will have to be made before the Registrar of Companies. Indeed, it is open to the Petitioner to make that grievance before the Registrar of Companies. 3 However, this decision cannot be pressed into service to deprive the Petitioner from receiving costs on account of wrong address given by the Respondent on the letter head, which created confusion in the mind of the Petitioner and also resulted in institution of the present Petition. 4. Accordingly, this Petition as well as Company Application are disposed of with liberty to the Petitioner to take recourse to such other remedy before appropriate Court of competent jurisdiction in respect of the claim involved in this Petition, which will be decided on its own merits in accordance with the law. The Respondent company shall pay costs quantified at Rs.7500/- to the Petitioner for the aforesaid reasons. The amount of cost shall be paid within one week from today. (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)