S.K.KESHOTE, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner -company and perused the entire material available on the record of the petition.
(2.) THIS is the Company Petition under Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 filed by the petitioner -company with a prayer that the respondent -company M/s. Magan Roller Flour Mills Private Limited be wound up under the provisions of Section 443 of the Companies Act, 1956. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner -company I am of the opinion that in such matters the effective and proper remedy is to file a suit. It is the developing tendency amongst litigants more particularly dealing with the companies registered under the Companies Act, 1956 to make this winding -up jurisdiction of the Court as a forum for recovery of their dues. This is not the purpose and object of the Companies Act, 1956. They are making this winding -up jurisdiction of the court as an executing court for recovery of their dues. At the threat of this winding -up petition, if it is not unknown, many litigants have been able to get their dues. I may remind to the litigants of this category of Order 87 of the CPC a special provision for summary suits. Order 37 of the CPC has been enacted for expeditious recovery of the dues of this category of creditors. But that remedy has deliberately not been availed of. The reason is very obvious. In a suit under Order 37 of the CPC a litigant has to pay heavy court fees. In the petition it is only a nominal court fees. The claim of the petitioner company against the respondent -company is of Rupees eighty -five lakhs.
(3.) BE that as it may I find that a cheque of rupees eighty -five lakh was there in the name of the petitioner -company. In case it is not honoured the remedy was to proceed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the respondent -company.;