Salil K.Roy Chowdhury, J. - (1.) This is a winding-up petition which was presented on the 11th of September, 1979, and on the returnable date notice was directed to be served on the company along with a copy of the petition. The company appeared and took leave to file an affidavit-in-opposition 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.) Thereafter, the matter was heard on the 3rd of December, 1979, and after hearing the parties it appeared to me that this was a matter which can be adjusted mutually and with that end in view to which the respective counsel for the parties agreed, the matter was adjourned from time to time till I was informed that it could not be settled amicably between the parties. Therefore, the matter was heard at length.
(3.) Mr. S.B. Mukherjee, appearing with Mr. S. Pal, for the petitioning-creditor, submitted that the petitioning-creditor, who is a contractor, was appointed by the company which is also a company carrying on the business of constructing multi-storeyed buildings at various parts of Calcutta. The petition was placed before me and it appears that there is no dispute as to the fact that the petitioning-creditor firm which is a registered partnership firm has carried out painting and white-washing works in the various construction projects of the respondent-company and submitted their running bills and ultimately a final bill for payment. In fact, the petitioning-creditor has received on account lump sum payments from time to time. By a letter dated the 1st of September, 1978, the petitioning-creditor-firm wrote to the company to confirm the amount due as on 30th of June, 1978, which account was checked by the company and a sum of Rs. 60,614.77 was confirmed to be the sum due up to 30th of June, 1978, by the company to the petitioning-creditor. It also appears that subsequently various other works were done and bills were submitted and the company also made on account payments by lump sum amounts as would appear from annex. A at pages 23-25 of the winding-up petition. The contractor firm claims a sum of Rs. 1,38,011.32 by the statutory notice dated the 12th of July, 1979, and the company has failed and neglected to pay the said amount. Mr. Mukherjee also produced the measurement sheets in respect of No. 18/3, Gariahat Road, Calcutta, which appears to have been checked and signed by the company's representative. Mr. Mukherjee also placed before me the correspondence between the parties and submitted that the disputes, sought to be raised as to the rates, measurement and amounts paid are not bona fide and having regard to the clear admission and checking of the measurement sheets by the representative of the company it must be held that the winding-up petition is not an abuse of the process of the court and the disputes raised by the company to the debt due to the petitioning-creditor are not bona fide and there is no substance or merit in the said defence either in law or in fact. Therefore, the winding-up petition should be admitted.;