Winding-up petition amendment and partnership registration bar: technical affidavit defects did not defeat a statutory proceeding.

A procedural amendment clarifying the constitution of a petitioner-firm in a winding-up petition may be permitted where it is bona fide, causes no prejudice, and introduces no fresh cause of action. A technical defect in verification or affidavit wording, by itself, does not justify rejection of the petition. Section 69 of the Indian Partnership Act does not bar such a petition because a winding-up proceeding is a statutory remedy, not a suit for enforcement of a contractual right. The amendment was allowed on a liberal approach, and the winding-up petition was left to proceed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the winding-up petition could be amended to clarify the constitution of the petitioner-firm notwithstanding the objection based on verification and the form of the supporting affidavit; (ii) whether section 69 of the Indian Partnership Act barred the winding-up petition by an unregistered firm.

Issue (i): Whether the winding-up petition could be amended to clarify the constitution of the petitioner-firm notwithstanding the objection based on verification and the form of the supporting affidavit.

Analysis: The power to permit amendment in a winding-up petition is available under the Companies (Court) Rules read with the Code of Civil Procedure, and such power may be exercised where the amendment is not mala fide and does not introduce a fresh cause of action. The defect pointed out in the affidavit was treated as technical: the deponent had linked his knowledge to the record and the absence of the ideal wording or fuller specification of the record did not, by itself, justify rejection of the petition or denial of amendment, especially when no prejudice was shown.

Conclusion: The objection based on verification failed, and the amendment was permissible.

Issue (ii): Whether section 69 of the Indian Partnership Act barred the winding-up petition by an unregistered firm.

Analysis: Section 69 applies to suits and other proceedings for enforcement of a right arising from contract. A winding-up petition is not a suit and does not seek enforcement of a contractual right; it invokes a statutory remedy under the Companies Act. The absence of an averment in the petition that the firm was registered did not, on that basis, defeat the proceeding, and the proposed amendment was only explanatory of the petitioner-firm's constitution.

Conclusion: Section 69 had no application to the winding-up petition, and the objection failed.

Final Conclusion: The amendment was allowed with costs on a liberal, non-technical approach, while the winding-up petition remained pending for further proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi: A procedural amendment clarifying the constitution of a petitioner-firm in a winding-up matter may be allowed where it introduces no new cause of action, and the registration bar in section 69 of the Indian Partnership Act does not apply to a winding-up petition because it is a statutory proceeding and not a suit for enforcement of a contractual right.

---