Winding up petition on unregistered lease debt fails where the claimed liability is not the debt properly demanded.

A winding up petition must rest on a presently payable debt supported by a proper statutory demand. A claim for rent or royalties under an unregistered lease was unenforceable because the lease had not been completed by registration, so the petitioner lacked a complete title to enforce the amount as rent. The petitioner also could not sustain the petition by shifting to a different alleged debt or different lease after demanding another sum. The petition was therefore legally unsupportable because the debt relied on was not the debt properly demanded and the claimed liability was not enforceable in the form asserted.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether a winding up petition could be maintained on the footing of rent or royalties said to be due under an unregistered lease, and (ii) whether a demand for one claimed sum could be supported in the petition by proving a different debt.

Issue (i): Whether a winding up petition could be maintained on the footing of rent or royalties said to be due under an unregistered lease.

Analysis: A winding up petition requires a debt that is presently payable and for which the petitioner has a complete title. The claimed rent or royalties depended upon completion of registration of the lease, and until that was done the petitioner could not enforce the claim as rent under the lease. The attempt to rely on the unregistered lease was also inconsistent with the statutory position governing registration and the enforceability of rights under such an instrument.

Conclusion: The claim for rent or royalties on the basis of the unregistered lease was not enforceable in the winding up petition.

Issue (ii): Whether a demand for one claimed sum could be supported in the petition by proving a different debt.

Analysis: The demand underlying a winding up petition must be for the debt actually due. A petitioner cannot found the proceeding on one demand and then sustain it by proving another alleged liability for the same amount under a different lease or different basis. Since no proper demand was made for the specific debt now relied upon, the petition was not legally supportable.

Conclusion: The petition could not be maintained on a debt different from the one demanded.

Final Conclusion: The company was not in a legal position to make the statutory demand on the footing advanced, and the winding up petition failed.

Ratio Decidendi: A winding up petition must rest on a presently payable debt for which a proper demand has been made, and the petitioner cannot substitute a different liability or an unperfected claim for the debt originally demanded.

---