Appeal Dismissed: Winding-Up Petition Upheld for Rs. 5 Lakhs

The Division Bench upheld the admission of the winding-up petition against the company for a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs, with interest. The company's appeal against the lower court's decision was set aside, emphasizing the need for winding up despite the absence of statutory notice. The review application before the Division Bench was dismissed due to unjustified delay, affirming the company's obligation to pay the debt in specified installments.

---

---

Issues:
1. Service of statutory notice for winding-up petition
2. Admittance of winding-up petition by lower court
3. Appeal against lower court's judgment
4. Review application before Division Bench

Issue 1: Service of statutory notice for winding-up petition
The petitioner filed a winding-up petition against the company, alleging non-payment of a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs lent and advanced. The company confirmed the balance and paid interest, but the statutory notice of demand was returned with "Not known" endorsement. The lower court held that there was a bona fide attempt to serve the notice, and it was duly served. The company claimed no valid service of notice, leading to a dispute.

Issue 2: Admittance of winding-up petition by lower court
The lower court admitted the winding-up petition, directing advertisement and payment of the admitted sum. The company appealed, and the Appellate Court set aside the judgment, ordering a fresh hearing. The company's review application was dismissed, and the matter was heard afresh, establishing the company's inability to pay the debt.

Issue 3: Appeal against lower court's judgment
The Appellate Court set aside the lower court's decision, emphasizing the need to consider the case for winding up even without the statutory notice. The company's contentions regarding a civil dispute with another party and lack of a valid license were considered insufficient to resist the winding-up petition.

Issue 4: Review application before Division Bench
The company filed a review application before the Division Bench, which was kept pending for a significant period. The review application was ultimately dismissed due to delay and lack of convincing explanation for the delay in filing. The Division Bench found the review application not entertainable at that stage, considering the timing and reasons for the delay.

In conclusion, the winding-up petition was admitted for the sum of Rs. 5 lakhs, with interest rates specified. The company was given the option to pay in monthly installments, with consequences for default outlined. The review application against the Appellate Court's judgment was dismissed due to delay and lack of merit.

---