- (1.) THIS petition is under Sections 433/434 read with Section 439 of the Companies Act, 1956, for the winding up of the respondent-company as, according to the petitioner, it is not in a position to clear off its debts and to meet other liabilities. The case in a nutshell is that the company owes Rs. 7,55,760. 40 to the petitioner-firm on account of the price of the material/goods supplied to it.
(2.) AS per the practice of business prevalent between the parties, the petitioner-firm would send quotations of the material to be purchased by the company and, in turn, the company would send the purchase orders mentioning the price of the material/goods along with the terms of payment. On receipt of these orders, the petitioner would supply the articles ordered along with a duplicate copy of the challan. The said challan used to be signed by the competent official of the stores department of the company on receipt of the goods. Later, the payment used to be remitted by the company to the petitioner. At times, in case of urgency, the company would even collect the material or goods from the petitioner without any formal purchase order or a challan but the bills concerning these supplies were always duly signed by the official of the company. On the basis of the book entries, a statement of account (annexure P-2) has been prepared for the year 1986-87 and as per the same, the abovesaid amount is standing due to the petitioner. In spite of repeated requests, he failed to clear off its accounts. Instead, in reply to the notice, annexure P-90, the company sent a telegram dated November 23, 1988, disputing the claim of the petitioner on the ground that it had been prepared fictitiously with a view to harm the reputation of the company. Besides this, a few other amounts, the details of which are mentioned in paragraphs 10 to 13 of the petition, are also due to the petitioner from the companion account of various goods supplied subsequent to April 1, 1987, and due to miscalculations or mistakes committed in certain bills issued by it. Qua these amounts which, according to the petitioner, are disputed amounts, it reserves its right to recover the same through appropriate proceedings in a proper forum.
(3.) AS against this, the respondent-company, while admitting its business dealings with the petitioner firm, maintains that the quality of the goods supplied by the petitioner and the market rate mentioned in the bills issued on its behalf had to be checked on receipt of the goods by the respondent and the bills used to be paid later in due course. It is further maintained on its behalf that whenever the goods were not up to the standard or the petitioner had mentioned a higher rate than the market rate of the goods supplied, the petitioner would take back its goods, cancel the bills and rectify the accounts. As per the running account of the company, an amount of Rs. 3,62,830. 49 was due and payable to the petitioner-firm. The respondent not only expressed its readiness and willingness to pay this amount but has actually paid the same through different cheques to the petitioner during the course of these proceedings. While denying the rest of the claim of the petitioner, it is highlighted on behalf of the respondent that either the goods supplied by the petitioner were not up to the prescribed standard or the rate sought to be charged was highly excessive or was over and above the market rate. A few instances have been specified in paragraph 3 of the written statement to show that the petitioner-firm had either rectified the bills or had failed to submit the correct bills. As a matter of fact, some such mistakes have even been admitted in the petition itself. Therefore, the company refuses to accept its liability to pay the above-noted amounts as claimed by the petitioner.;