Parallel winding-up petitions are not maintainable once liquidation is pending; claims must be pursued in the existing process.

A second winding-up petition concerning the same company is not maintainable once an earlier winding-up order has already been made and liquidation proceedings are pending. The proper course for any claimant is to pursue its claim within the existing liquidation before the Official Liquidator. The ruling bars parallel winding-up proceedings for the same company and confirms that remedies must be worked out in the pending liquidation process.

---

---

Issues: Whether a second winding-up petition in respect of the same company was maintainable when winding-up proceedings were already pending and the company had been directed to be wound up in earlier proceedings.

Analysis: The petition sought winding up of the respondent company under the Companies Act, 1956. The record showed that an earlier winding-up petition in respect of the same company had already resulted in an order directing winding up, with liquidation proceedings pending before the Official Liquidator. In that situation, a parallel winding-up petition concerning the same company could not be entertained. Any claim of the petitioner was required to be pursued in the pending liquidation.

Conclusion: The second winding-up petition was not maintainable and was dismissed. The petitioner was left at liberty to take appropriate steps for lodging its claim in the pending liquidation proceedings.

Final Conclusion: The decision bars parallel winding-up proceedings for the same company once liquidation is already underway, and directs claimants to pursue their remedies in the existing liquidation process.

Ratio Decidendi: A second winding-up petition concerning the same company is not maintainable once an order of winding up has already been passed and liquidation proceedings are pending; claims must be pursued within the liquidation.

---