WASTINGHOUSE SAXBY FARMER LTD Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a winding-up petition which was presented on the 20th December, 1979. On the returnable date, a notice was directed to be served along with the copy of the petition on the company. The company appeared and took leave to file an affidavit to show Cause why the winding-up petition should not be admitted and the petitioning creditor also took leave to file an affidavit in reply.

(2.) The petitioning-creditor's claim arises out of the price of goods sold and delivered pursuant to the various orders placed by the company bet-been 22nd September, 1977 and 25th March, 1978, for various quantities of steel sections at agreed rates. Pursuant to the said orders, the petitioning-creditor duly submitted the bills along with the receipted challans to the company-particulars of which are set out in para. 8 of the petition. It appears that the company accepted the said goods and the bills in respect of the same without any objection and the total amount of the bills is Rs. 13,044 and, as the company failed to pay the said amount of the bills, the petitioning-creditor made a claim for interest and, thereafter, served several demand notices to the company in spite of which the company failed and neglected to pay the said amount. Ultimately by a statutory notice dated 9th November, 1979, the petitioning-creditor through its advocate served on the company at its registered office claiming the said price of goods along with the interest. The company failed to pay the said amount and, after the expiry of the statutory period of the said notice, the present winding-up petition was filed as hereinbefore stated.

(3.) From the winding-up petition and the annexures thereto it prima facie appears that there was no dispute as to the contract between the parties and the supply of goods and the submissions of the bills by the petitioning-creditor at any stage whatsoever. It is only in the affidavit which was affirmed by one, Tapan Chatterji, on the 29th January, 1980, alleged to be the secretary of the company in para. 6, that for the first time the company admits only one of the bills dated 22nd September, 1977, admitting the supply of the said goods under the bills and the company being liable to pay the said bills to the petitioning-creditor and expresses its readiness and willingness to pay the said bills. But regarding the other bills it is alleged that on enquiry and scrutiny in the office of the respondent-company it came to the knowledge of the company that in collusion and conspiracy with some employees of the company the petitioner has committed fraud upon the company in delivering indigenous materials although the contract was for sale of foreign made materials and also inflating the amounts of the said bills and showing therein larger quantities of goods than had actually been delivered. It is also alleged that there was dishonesty on the part of the petitioner in collusion with the employees of the company for supplying cheaper indigenous materials in violation of the contractual obligations.