Winding-up notice compliance under the Companies Act must be strict before a fresh petition can be maintained.

A winding-up petition under sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 requires strict compliance with the statutory notice of demand, which must correspond to the amount due at the date of the notice. An earlier petition rejected on a technical ground does not extinguish the underlying debt, but the same notice cannot automatically support a fresh winding-up petition. Because the notice is a condition precedent to this statutory remedy, a second petition based on the earlier notice was not maintainable and was rejected, leaving the creditor free to issue a fresh notice and proceed anew.

---

---

Issues: Whether a second winding-up petition could be maintained on the strength of the same notice under section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, after an earlier petition based on that notice had been rejected on a technical ground.

Analysis: The statutory scheme of sections 433 and 434 requires a creditor to serve a notice demanding payment of the amount then due before seeking winding up on the ground of inability to pay debts. The notice is a condition precedent, but in a winding-up petition the demand must strictly correspond to the amount due on the date of the notice. Although rejection of the earlier petition on a technical ground did not extinguish the creditor's underlying claim, the earlier notice could not be treated as automatically available for a fresh winding-up petition. Since the remedy under section 434 is creature of statute and discretion is exercised in a winding-up proceeding, strict compliance with the notice requirement was necessary.

Conclusion: The second petition was not maintainable on the basis of the earlier notice and was liable to be rejected. The creditors were left free to serve a fresh notice and present a fresh winding-up petition.

---