(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellant-company impugning an order dated 22nd July, 1997 passed by the learned Company Judge admitting a winding up petition and directing its advertisement once in the Statesman and once in the Biswamitra. Against the said order of the learned Company Judge, an appeal has been preferred and the Appellate Court by an order dated 23rd September, 1997, while admitting the appeal, ordered that no further steps be taken pursuant to the advertisement so published. While considering this appeal we have found that in the order under appeal the learned Company Judge held that there are some disputes raised by the Company but there is no finding by the learned Company Judge that the disputes are not bona fide disputes.
(2.) The material facts are that petitioning creditor filed a winding up petition after serving a statutory notice of demand. The service of notice of demand is also disputed. The claim is for goods sold and delivered. While disputing the claim of the petitioning creditor the company raised the defence as follows :--
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioning creditor submitted that the notice was sent under registered post with A/D on the correct address after payment of postal charges and everything and as such sending of the notice under registered post with A/D raises a presumption of service. At the same time it is true that such presumption is rebuttable and when Sri Gopal Jana himself refused on oath that the said notice has not been received by him, the presumption is rebutted and the whole thing is covered within the thicket of factual disputes which cannot be adjudicated in a winding up Proceedings.