( 1 ) APPELLANT, M/s. Ashok Fashions Limited, has filed this appeal against the order passed by learned Company Judge on 29. 2. 1996 in Company Petition No. 25 of 96, whereby the learned Company Judge, after admitting the Company Petition, has directed public advertisement on or before 8th March 1996 in Gujarati daily Gujarat samachar and English daily The Times of india. It is further ordered that the final date of hearing to be notified would be 30- 3-1996.

( 2 ) THE respondent herein presented a company Petition before the learned Company judge praying for winding up of the appellant-Company as in spite of statutory legal notice under the Companies Act 1956 calling upon the appellant to pay the principal sum of Rs, 1,69,290/- together with interest thereon at the agreed rate of 24% p. a. the Company has failed to honour the same. In the Company Petition, the respondent herein made the following averments on oath:-"2. The Company above-named, viz. Ashok Fashions Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the Company") is incorporated and registered under the Companies Act, 1956 as a Public Company limited by shares. 3. THE factory and office of the Company is situated at Opp. House of kaydees, Narol, Ahmedabad-382 405. 4. The nominal capital, capital paid up or credited as paid up of the Company is as per the record available in that behalf with the Registrar of Companies, the necessary details whereof if required, would be furnished to the Honble Court during the course of the hearing of this petition. 5. The main objects of the Company to be persued by it on its incorporation, and other objects incidental or ancillary to the attainment of objects are as set forth in its memorandum of Association. The petitioner shall furnish the necessary details in that regard as and when required by the honble Court. "the learned Company Judge issued notice returnable on 29. 2. 1996. From the record it appears that the affidavit of refusal of service was filed by the respondent, and on the returnable date, the Court admitted the petition and passed the order as aforesaid.

( 3 ) MR. Kamal Trivedi, learned advocate submitted that the order of publication for winding up of the appellant-Company is obtained by the respondent by suppression of material facts as well as by misrepresentation of important facts so as to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under the Companies act. It was submitted that though it was within the knowledge of the respondent that the appellant-Company is having its registered office at Calcutta, and under the companies Act, the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta has the jurisdiction, by misleading the Court to the effect that the record is available with the Registrar of companies, Gujarat State, Ahmedabad and by not disclosing that the Registered Office of the appellant-Company is situated at calcutta, has obtained the orders.

( 4 ) LEARNED advocate further submitted that the Honourable Supreme Court of India, after consulting the High Courts, made rules in exercise of powers conferred by sub-Sees. 1 and 2 of Section 643 of the companies Act and the rules are known as the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules ). As per sub-rule (13) of Rule 2, the prescribed forms are included in the Rules. Rule 95 of the said Rules mandates that a petition for winding up a Company shall be in Form no. 45, 46 or 47, as the case may be, with such variations as the circumstances may require. Mr. Trivedi, learned advocate submitted that clauses 2, 3 and 4 of the said form No. 45 are very much relevant and if there is non-disclosure of the materials required to be disclosed as per the form prescribed under Rule 95, the petition ought not to have been entertained. Clause 3 mandates that the applicant has to specifically state where the registered office of the company is situated. Clause 4 mandates that the petitioner must disclose as to what is the nominal capital of the Company and is divided in