Appellate Court reconsiders winding-up petition, orders payment of due amount with interest.

The Appellate Court allowed reconsideration of the winding-up petition after initially declining admission due to non-compliance with payment conditions. The petitioning creditor claimed Rs. 1.45 lakh under an agreement for money due, supported by additional documents. The company's objection based on a no-dues certificate requirement was dismissed. The Court found the company liable to pay the petitioner the due amount, ordering payment of the principal sum with interest. Failure to comply would result in the winding-up petition proceeding.

---

---

Issues:
1. Review of the order declining to admit the winding-up petition and the one dismissing the review application.
2. Validity of the claim by the petitioning creditor under an agreement for money due.
3. Requirement of a no-dues certificate for payment under the memorandum of understanding.
4. Dispute over payment made by a sister concern on behalf of the company.
5. Company's contention regarding petitioner's failure to cooperate on provident fund dues.
6. Admissibility of additional documents submitted by the petitioning creditor.
7. Determination of the company's liability to pay the petitioner the due amount.

Analysis:
1. The creditor's winding-up petition was initially stayed due to non-compliance with a condition for payment. Despite a review attempt, the petition was not admitted. The Appellate Court allowed reconsideration based on new documents.

2. The petitioning creditor claims money under an agreement where land was conveyed to the company. A sum of Rs. 1.45 lakh remains due as per a memorandum of understanding.

3. The company objected to the petition, citing the requirement of a no-dues certificate for payment. The petitioner failed to produce this certificate initially, leading to the petition's rejection.

4. A cheque for Rs. 1.45 lakh was dishonored, leading to a dispute over payment made by a sister concern on behalf of the company.

5. The company alleged the petitioner's non-cooperation on provident fund dues but lacked substantial evidence to support the claim.

6. The petitioning creditor submitted additional documents, including a letter from the electricity company and a money receipt, to support the claim.

7. The Court determined the company's liability to pay the petitioner the due amount, considering the clearance of electricity dues as sufficient evidence to warrant payment. The company was ordered to pay the principal sum with interest, failing which the winding-up petition would proceed.

This detailed analysis covers the various legal issues involved in the judgment, highlighting the key arguments and decisions made by the Court in the case.

---