JUDGMENT :

R.M. Chhaya, J.

Heard Mr.S.M.Gohil, learned counsel appearing with Mr.Hardik Soni, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.P.Majmudar, learned counsel for the respondent-Company.

2. The petitioner has filed this petition under Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 for winding up of the respondent Company viz. M/s. K.K.Interlinings Manufacturing Private Limited, having its registered office at 11, Vikram Society, Opp.Yash Complex, Gotri Road, Vadodara.

3. The petitioner has claimed that an amount of Rs. 17,89,189/- along with interest is due and payable by the respondent-Company. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent-Company showed his desire to purchase goods from the petitioner in huge quantity with promise and assurance that whatever purchase is made by the respondent-Company, shall be paid before the due date, failing which the respondent-Company also agreed to pay the interest at the rate of 24% per annum. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent-Company purchased gray fabrics under different bills as per its requirement from the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that the original Challan, lorry receipts and bills were sent to the respondent-Company along with goods, which were found in good condition by the respondent-Company. It is further the case of the petitioner as described in paragraph No.5 of the petition that out of said transactions, respondent-Company has not paid an amount to the tune of Rs. 17,89,189/- towards 17 bills of different numbers and different dates. It is further case of the petitioner that the respondent-Company has acknowledged the same and even though repeated demands were made, the petitioner has not received any amount against the aforesaid bills.

4. It appears from the record of the petition that on 07.04.2010, the petitioner resorted to arbitration proceedings against the respondent- Company before Mumbai Textile Merchants Mahajan being Arbitration Case No.2 of 2010/2011. The petitioner taking basis of arbitration proceedings, which were ultimately dismissed vide notice dated 13.10.2010 issued notice under Sections 433 and 434 of the Act on 19.03.2012, which came to be replied by the respondent- Company vide its reply dated 06.04.2012. The petitioner has specifically stated that as per the directions given by the Arbitrators, present petition is filed.

5. The petitioner has contended that the respondent-Company has taken false defence even before the arbitration proceedings and has never paid dues, which are due and payable. It may be noted that in paragraph No.15 of the petition, the petitioner has taken specific ground on the basis of which, the petitioner has prayed that the respondent-Company be wound up.

6. In response to the notice issued by this Court, the respondent-Company appeared and filed its reply and has specifically denied the fact that amount as claimed for in the petition is due and payable. The respondent-Company has contended that the petitioner has made false statement that the petitioner has supplied goods to the respondent-Company, in fact no goods were ever supplied to the respondent-Company. It is also contended that the bills are wrongly raised and the same are frivolous. It is specifically contended by the respondent-Company that not a single good has ever been supplied by the petitioner and even statement that the same were received in good condition is denied and disputed by the respondent-Company. The respondent-Company has further contended that even in the order of arbitration proceedings, which is made on the basis of filing of present petition, it is nowhere stated that the petitioner may file present petition before this Court. The respondent-Company has contended that dues are disputed and same are unascertainable and therefore, this petition is not maintainable. The respondent-Company has contended that transactions between the petitioner and the respondent-Company were not business transaction but we