Winding-up petition amendments: a misspelt company name was corrected, and re-advertisement was not required.

A winding-up petition and order were treated as amendable to correct a misspelt company name where the error was trifling and unlikely to mislead. The company had appeared in the misspelt name and could not rely on the defect to defeat the order. Exercising the power to waive formal defects under rule 217 of the Companies (Winding up) Rules, 1909, the court held that it could correct the petition to reflect the proper company name and the judgment debt. The petition was treated as amended, and re-advertisement was unnecessary.

---

---

Issues: Whether a winding-up petition and the resulting order could be amended to correct a misspelt company name, and whether the order could stand without re-advertisement.

Analysis: The incorrect spelling was treated as a very trifling error that could not have misled anyone. The company itself had entered appearance in the misspelt name, and the court held that it could not rely on the error to defeat the order. Relying on the power to waive formal defects under rule 217 of the Companies (Winding up) Rules, 1909, the court held that it had jurisdiction to correct the petition so that it reflected the correct company name and the judgment debt on which the petition was founded. In those circumstances, the petition could be treated as amended and the winding-up order could be made effective without further advertisement.

Conclusion: The petition was permitted to be amended, the winding-up order was maintained against the correctly named company, and re-advertisement was held unnecessary.

---