Disputed running-account entries cannot by themselves sustain a winding up petition; the proper remedy is a civil suit.

Liability based only on disputed running-account entries in books of account cannot be conclusively established in a summary winding up proceeding, because such entries are relevant under Section 34 of the Evidence Act but do not by themselves prove the debt unless properly supported. Where the claim depends on year-to-year adjustments and requires detailed proof, the dispute is unsuitable for adjudication in a winding up petition under the Companies Act and must be tried in a civil suit. The winding up petition was therefore held not maintainable, leaving the petitioner to pursue civil remedies.

---

---

Issues: Whether a winding up petition is maintainable where the alleged debt is founded on a running account and entries in books of account, and whether the proper remedy is a civil suit.

Analysis: Liability resting only on entries in books of account cannot be treated as conclusively proved in a summary proceeding. Section 34 of the Evidence Act makes such entries relevant, but they do not by themselves fix liability unless properly proved. Since the claim was based on a running account and the petitioner's own case showed that accounts were maintained and adjusted from year to year, the dispute was one that required detailed proof. Such questions cannot appropriately be examined in a winding up petition under section 433 of the Companies Act and are fit for determination in a civil suit.

Conclusion: The winding up petition was not maintainable and the petitioner was left to pursue a civil suit.

Ratio Decidendi: A debt founded on disputed running-account entries requires proof beyond a summary winding up proceeding, and mere account entries are insufficient by themselves to establish liability for winding up.

---