1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. COMPANY PETITION NO.332 OF 2009 Ajit V. Pangam. ...Petitioner. Versus India Infoline Limited. ...Respondent. ....... Mr. P.M. Shah for the Petitioner. Mr.Rahul Chitnis with Mr. A.Daver anbd Mr. Sameer Khedekar i/b. M/s.Thakore Jariwala & Asso. for the Respondent. Mr. P.Ramarao, O.L. present. ...... CORAM : DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. November 19, 2009. P.C.: The Company Petition for winding up is misconceived. The claim in the petition arises out of a transaction of shares. The Petitioner claims that he is entitled to a refund of a surplus generated by the disposal of 1770 shares of Cairns India at Rs. 161.31 per share and 1800 shares of Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. at the rate of Rs. 498.50 per share. The aggregate claim is at Rs.1,08,982/-. In paragraph 16 of the affidavit in reply, the Company has furnished a chart of the trade which was conducted on 20th October 2008. The Company has denied that there was an amount of Rs.1,08,982/- due and owing to the Petitioner. According to the Company, an amount of 2 Rs. 2.20 lakhs was due to its wholly owned subsidiary from whom the Petitioner had obtained a funding facility. Pursuant to the said arrangement, the Petitioner is stated to have executed a Power of Attorney to deal with the shares. Having regard to the nature of the defence, it is manifestly inappropriate to entertain a Company Petition for winding up. The claim essentially involves a resolution of accounts in a trading transaction. Moreover, from the material on record, it cannot be asserted that the Company is unable to pay its debts. The Petitioner has a remedy of pursuing its claim in pursuance of the arbitration agreement. The Company Petition is dismissed. ....