Re P.T. Karang Pilang Agung

Read the full judgment text of HCCW 4/1996 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 3 September 2001.

1. In 1996, this petition was presented by Bank PDFCI formerly known as P.T. Private Development Finance Company of Indonesia (which I will refer to as "the petitioning bank") on a Company called P.T. Karang Pilang Agung, an Indonesian company.

Case No.HCCW 4/1996
Court
High Court CFI
Date03 Sep 2001
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCCW000004/1996

HCCW 4/1996

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

COMPANIES WINDING-UP PROCEEDINGS NO. 4 OF 1996

____________

IN THE MATTER of P.T. KARANG PILANG AGUNG
AND
IN THE MATTER of the Companies Ordinance, Chapter 32

____________

Coram: Hon Yuen J in Court

Date of Hearing: 3 September 2001

Date of Judgment: 3 September 2001

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

1.In 1996, this petition was presented by Bank PDFCI formerly known as P.T. Private Development Finance Company of Indonesia (which I will refer to as "the petitioning bank") on a Company called P.T. Karang Pilang Agung, an Indonesian company.

2.The alleged indebtedness was 23 billion Indonesian rupees. A statutory demand had been served on 23 November 1995 that was not satisfied and the petition was presented in January 1996. It would appear that very little action had been taken in the prosecution of this petition since the presentation of the petition in 1996. There was in 1996 an application to amend the petition but Rogers J (as he then was) sitting as the Companies Judge adjourned the matter and ordered that a proper application should be made for service out on the Company. Nothing happened since then and it would appear that the inactivity was not noticed by the Official Receiver.

3.In February 2001, the Petitioner's solicitors asked to cease to act and in June 2001, after various enquiries were made and an adjournment was granted for the purposes of service, the order to cease to act was granted.

4.On 13 August, Chung J sitting in the Companies Court ordered notice of the hearing of the petition today to be served on the Petitioner. I have before me a letter dated 15 August 2001 from the Official Receiver's Office to the petitioning bank at the address set out in the petition and to which the various notices sent by its former solicitors had been sent.

5.The Petitioner has not appeared before me today, apparently nor has anyone representing the Company. There are no supporting or opposing creditors. Accordingly, I would dismiss the petition with costs (if any) to the Company.

(MARIA YUEN)
Judge of the Court of First Instance
High Court

Representation:

Miss McKenna from the Official Receiver's Office

The Petitioner and the Company being absent