https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108210 A winding-up petition under the Companies Act, 1956 cannot be used as a device for debt recovery where an alternative civil remedy is available. On the facts, the claim arose from an alleged balance for cotton bale supplies and a dishonoured cheque, but the ledger history, past payments, and absence of action under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act indicated that the petition was being used to pressure for payment rather than to invoke winding-up jurisdiction bona fide. The proper remedy for recovery of the disputed amount was a civil suit, including a summary suit if maintainable. Winding-up proceedings were therefore unavailable for mere realisation of bills. en-us Fri, 30 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Mar 2012 14:53:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108210 A winding-up petition under the Companies Act, 1956 cannot be used as a device for debt recovery where an alternative civil remedy is available. On the facts, the claim arose from an alleged balance for cotton bale supplies and a dishonoured cheque, but the ledger history, past payments, and absence of action under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act indicated that the petition was being used to pressure for payment rather than to invoke winding-up jurisdiction bona fide. The proper remedy for recovery of the disputed amount was a civil suit, including a summary suit if maintainable. Winding-up proceedings were therefore unavailable for mere realisation of bills. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 30 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108210