*1* cp.823.08.sxw kps I N THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY PETITION NO.823 OF 2008 M/s Priya Electricals. ..Petitioner -Versus- M/s Sonak Surface Technologies Pvt.Ltd.. ..Respondent .......... Mr.Anil R. Mishra, for the Petitioner. Mr.Ashish Kamat i/b Sanjay S. Gawde, for the Respondent. .......... CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 09th August, 2010. P.C. 1 This is a petition for winding up the Respondent/ Company inter-alia on the ground that it is unable to pay it’s debt. 2 I do not suggest that the Petitioner does not have a valid claim against the Respondent. It is, however, difficult in this Company Petition to decide the rival contentions. 3 The Petitioner admittedly supplied the machinery to the Respondent. Under the agreement the Petitioner was bound only to supply the machinery. The contention that though the machinery was supplied it was not properly installed, is not bona-fide. The plain language of the purchase order belies the same and in the rejoinder the Petitioner has admitted that the Petitioner’s sister concern was to install the machinery. Further there appears to be nothing on record *2* cp.823.08.sxw till the filing of the petition to the effect that installation was not proper. 4 Despite the same, this Company Petition is dismissed on the limited ground that it is not possible to determine whether or not the payment has been made to the Petitioner. In the affidavit in reply, the Respondent stated that an amount aggregating to Rs.4.50 lacs by four cheques was paid by it’s sister concern M/s Sonak Industries to the Petitioner. The Petitioner’s contention in the rejoinder is that the payments were towards a transaction with the Petitioner’s sister concern M/s Balan Electricals. It appears that the parties have been adjusting the payments in the accounts of their sister concerns. It is not possible in this proceeding to take any particular view and determine the veracity of the respective transactions and to adjust accounts. The Petitioner must adopt appropriate proceedings to recover the amounts if any are due. 5 In the circumstances, the Company Petition is dismissed. The amount deposited towards publication shall be refunded to the Petitioner forthwith. -