2003 (7) TMI 491

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ndebted to the petitioner for a sum of Rs. One lakh and odd. The petitioner then claimed to have raised the Bill, by raising a demand on the respondent. He alleged that towards this demand, the respondent company issued a cheque worth Rs. 1,00,000 being No.257718, dated 16-6-2000 in favour of petitioner, but was returned by the Bank for which a case under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act is pending against the respondent company before the court at Sendhwa. He then further alleged that respondent has paid a sum of Rs. 75,000 and balance of Rs. 1,22,561 with interest (Rs. 21,559) up to 31-3-2001 totalling Rs. 1,44,320 not having been paid, as observed supra, the petitioner sent a demand notice to the respondent calling upon them ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ts. It is for this purpose and keeping in view this objective, the Legislature has enacted sub-section (2) of section 443 which empowers the Company Court to exercise powers while hearing a petition for winding up. Sub-section (2) does empower the Company Court to refuse to make an order of winding up, if it is of an opinion that some other remedy is available to the petitioners and that they are acting unreasonably in seeking to have the company wound up instead of pursuing that other remedy. 6. In normal circumstances, the remedy of petitioner for recovery of Rs. 1,44,320 lies in filing civil suit under the general law on establishing his claim. It is essentially an isolated commercial transaction for supply of certain goods to the res....