SANJIB BANERJEE,J. - (1.) None appears to oppose the petition even at the second call. No affidavit-in-opposition appears to have been filed by the company. A copy of the proposed affidavit-in-opposition has, however, been forwarded to the petitioner.
(2.) The claim of the petitioner is on account of price of goods sold and delivered. By the statutory notice of July 18, 2011, the petitioner claimed an outstanding amount of Rs. 63,576/- and interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum. Despite due receipt of such statutory notice, the company did not respond thereto. However, a further statutory notice was sent on August 12, 2011 containing the same demand. The company appears to have received the second statutory notice but did not respond thereto.
(3.) The petitioner has relied on the bills raised on the company and the documents evidencing delivery of the goods.;