Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1980 (2) TMI 212

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The petitioning-creditor's claim arises out of sale of C.I. Scrap (Skull) at agreed rate to the company which was received by the company on the 23rd of April, 1979, and the petitioning creditor submitted its bill on the 23rd of April, 1979, for the sum of ₹ 10,831,22. The said bill was accepted without any objection and the company also issued a receipted challan and weighment certificate in respect of the said goods and accepted the bill of the petitioning-creditor. Copies of the bill, the weighment certificate and receipted challan are annexed to the petition and the originals were produced at the time of hearing before me. It is alleged by the petitioning-creditor that objection was never raised in respect of the said goods .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... th a view to raise a dispute has caused a letter dated the 25th of August, 1979, which strangely appears to be a public holiday sent by registered post on the 27th of August, 1979, to the petitioning-creditor alleging rejection of the goods and on the ground that the goods were not C.I. Scarp (Skull) but stags of furnace. The said letter also refers to an alleged letter of the company dated 24th of April, 1979, which is now alleged to have been sent to the petitioning-creditor under certificate of posting wherein it is alleged that the goods were not according to specification but absolutely below standard and are nothing but slags of furnace and the petitioning-creditor was alleged to have been asked to remove the said goods. Now, the w .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ter dated the 24th of April, 1979, that is, the next day after receiving the said goods. The said certificate of posting cannot be in the facts and circumstances of the case a genuine document as, having regard to the bills and the presentation of the same several times for payment and the signed challan and the weighment certificate, the said letter is highly improbable and must be held to be a document brought into existence with a view to raise a dispute or create a cloud on the admitted debt due to the petitioning-creditor. Mr. Mitter also rightly submitted that after receipt of the statutory notice served on behalf of the petitioning-creditor through its advocate-on-record, which was received by the company on the 27th of August, 1979, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... te the endorsement on the weighment certificate as that of the representative of the company. Therefore, he submitted that the company has raised a bona fide dispute to the claim of the petitioning-creditor and the winding-up petition is an abuse of the process of the court and should be dismissed. Taking the matter as a whole and from the conduct of the company I am satisfied that the company is trying to raise a frivolous, false and fictitious dispute and trying to create confusion. The goods were accepted by the company without any objection as would appear from the challan, weighment certificate and the bills and the bill-cover endorsed for various dates to call for payment. There is no difference in the description of the goods b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n 27th of August, 1979, by registered post. In any event, the said letter dated the 24th of April, 1979, seems to be out of place and highly improbable and could not have been in existence earlier. The sending of a letter by certificate of posting is commented upon in the well-known decision of the appeal court in Ramashankar Prosad v . Sindhri Iron Foundry P. Ltd., AIR 1966 Cal. 512. In these circumstances, I am unable to accept the contention of the company and I hold that there is no bona fide dispute or at least any dispute raised in good faith, and the company is unable to pay its debt. Therefore, at this stage it cannot be said that the winding-up petition is an abuse of the process of the court. Only raising a dispute which is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates