Company's Dispute Deemed Not Genuine, Court Orders Winding-Up. Petitioners' Costs Covered by Company Assets.

The court found that the company's dispute regarding the debt was not bona fide and ordered the winding-up of the company as per the petition. The costs of the petitioners are to be covered by the company's assets.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the company owes the petitioners the sum of Rs. 3,24,569.75 or any other sum.
2. Whether the dispute raised by the company regarding the debt is bona fide.
3. Whether the winding-up petition is a proper remedy for the adjudication of the dispute.

Summary:

Issue 1: Debt Owed by the Company
The petitioners claimed that the company accepted eight bills of exchange dated 17th June 1975, but failed to pay the amounts due upon maturity. The company paid Rs. 49,140 for one bill but neglected the remaining amount. The petitioners issued a notice u/s 434 of the Companies Act, demanding Rs. 3,03,132.50 plus interest, which the company ignored. The petitioners allege the company is unable to pay its debts, citing the company's last balance-sheet as evidence of commercial unsoundness.

Issue 2: Bona Fide Dispute
The company, in its affidavit, admitted accepting the bills but claimed the acceptance was conditional upon sufficient credits from Everkeen Blade Company. The company argued it was not liable as Everkeen Blade Company had no outstanding credit. The petitioners countered that the company's dispute was not bona fide but a tactic to delay payment. The court examined the affidavits and found no particulars of the alleged conditional agreement, deeming the company's story improbable and not bona fide.

Issue 3: Winding-Up Petition as Remedy
The court referred to precedents, including Tulsidas Lalubhai v. Bharatkhand Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. and In re British India General Insurance Co. Ltd., to determine that a winding-up petition is not suitable for disputes requiring elaborate inquiry unless the dispute is not bona fide. The court concluded that the company's dispute was not genuine and was raised to cover its inability to pay.

Conclusion:
The court found the company's dispute regarding the debt to be not bona fide and ordered the winding-up of the company as per prayer (a) of the petition. The costs of the petitioners are to come out of the assets of the company.

---