VISHWAKALA PRINTERS Vs. CHIPPER SNACKER PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred challenging the order passed bv the learned Single Judge who has declined to entertain the company petition on the ground, that prima facie, he is satisfied that the debt is disputed and it is not certain, and therefore no case for entertaining the Company Petition Is made out.

(2.) The appellant firm is doing business of printing and stationery, graphics materials, paper products. The respondent is a private limited company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. The case of the appellant is that as per the orders of the respondent's company, they have supplied danglers on various dates total amounting to Rs.4,98,720.00, the details of which are set out in the Company Petition. The said payments had to be made within 60 days. The respondent did not make any payments inspite of several requests and reminders. Ultimately, a statutory notice under Sec. 433 (e) of the Companies Act, 1956 was issued and was duly served on the respondent They sent a reply denying the liability. Therefore, the appellant was constrained to file a company petition seeking for winding up of the company on the ground that the respondent's company is unable to pay its debts. After service of notice, the respondent entered appearance and filed a detailed statement of objections contesting the claim. Though they admitted the supplies, they denied the supplies as set out in the petition. They also contended that the supplies included defective material and it was not according to their specifications.

(3.) After hearing both the counsels, the learned Company Judge was of the view that prima facie there is no material to show that the supplies and invoices were received by the respondent, the amount claimed is not definite and not ascertainable. The respondent company is carrying on business and it is not commercially insolvent. The machinery for winding up cannot be allowed to be utilised merely as a means of realising debts due from a company and therefore, it declined to entertain the petition, Aggrieved by the same, the appellant has preferred this appeal.