1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION jmi COMPANY PETITION NO.318 OF 2009. In the matter of winding up of M/s. SRE Machineries Pvt.Ltd. M/s. M.B. Enterprises. ..Petitioner. .... Mr. Vijay M. Vaghela, for Petitioner. .... CORAM : S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. DATE : 23RD SEPTEMBER 2009. P.C. By this petition, the petitioner is seeking winding up of the company M/s. SRE Machineries Private Limited. The petitioner has under three invoices supplied to the respondent company Power Master Make Worm Reduction Gearbox of several descriptions/ratios as set out in Exhibits ‘B’, ‘C’ and ‘D’ to the petition. The amount due and payable by the respondent to the petitioner under the said three invoices for labour charges and goods supplied to the respondent aggregated to Rs.1,12,888/- which the respondent company was bound and liable to pay to the petitioner within 30 days, failing which the 2 respondent company was to pay interest at the rate of 21% per annum on each of such outstanding invoice. 2. The petitioner has submitted that despite repeated demands, the respondent failed to pay the outstanding dues. The excuse given by the respondent was that they are running under heavy losses and therefore, unable to pay the outstanding dues to the petitioner. The petitioner ultimately by their Advocate’s notice dated 2 nd February 2009 called upon the respondent to pay to the petitioner the outstanding amount of Rs.1,12,888/- with interest at the rate of 21% per annum within 21 days of the receipt of the said notice, failing which the petitioner would file winding up petition under section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 against the respondent. The packet containing the notice was returned back with the remarks “un- claimed” as can be seen from Exhibit-K to the petition. Thereafter, the petitioner served the company petition on the respondent which was received by the respondent company as can be seen from Exhibit- C to the affidavit of service dated 8 th May 2009. 3 3. The petitioner, therefore, submits that the respondent is unable to pay its debt and therefore, deserves to be wound up. 4. Since there is no reply to the statutory notice and the respondent has further chosen to remain absent, despite service, the Court would have to proceed on the basis of the averments contained in the petition. The company petition is accordingly, admitted and made returnable on 3 rd November 2009 and is directed to be advertised. 5. The petitioner to advertise the petition in two local newspapers, namely “Free Press Journal”, “Maharashtra Times” and in the Maharashtra Government Gazette. The petitioner shall deposit an amount of Rs.10,000/- with the Prothonotary and Senior Master towards the publication charges, within three weeks, with intimation to the Company Registrar, failing which the petition shall stand dismissed for non-prosecution. [ S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. ]