JUDGMENT :

ASHUTOSH SHASTRI, J.

1. By way of this appeal under Section 483 of the Companies Act, 1956 a challenge is made to an order dated 06.01.2016 passed by the learned Company Judge in Company Petition No. 245 of 2014 whereby the main Company Petition was admitted with consequential direction.

2. The brief facts leading to the rise of present appeal are that original petitioner i.e. respondent company is incorporated under the provisions of the laws of Kenya and is carrying on the business of exporting grains to various countries, including India. The original respondent Company was incorporated on 18.12.2006, under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). It is the case of appellant that in the course of business of trading and exporting of foodgrains, the orders were placed by appellant company for supply of goods such as Moong, Cow-peas red, various types of beans and from time to time, the original petitioner company i.e. Kamili Packers Pvt. Ltd. exported and shipped the goods from Nairobi and delivered to the respondent Company i.e. present appellant. The appellant original respondent had assured the original petitioner company for payment immediately upon receipt of the goods since on earlier occasion also, the goods were supplied and on account of such relations without insisting on an advance, or even a Letter of Credit in respect of the orders placed, the goods were loaded in the presence of, and under the supervision of, one Mr. Vijay Patel, who is representative of the present appellant Company, the goods were sold and delivered to the respondent Company i.e. present appellant and the invoices were raised for an amount of US$ 1,079,133=00 which approximately equivalent to Rs.6,51,79,633=20. According to original petitioner i.e. present respondent, all the invoices were duly accepted and in response to this transaction, the amount aggregating to US$ 3,019,498=50 was due and payable, against which, the present appellant Company has merely paid to the original petitioner company, an amount aggregating US$ 1,940,365=50 only and despite request having been made for balance payment, the present appellant-original respondent company failed to clear the said amount and as such an amount to the extent of US$ 1,079,133=00, remain outstanding payable to the original petitioner.

2.1 It is the case of the original petitioner i.e. respondent herein that despite repeated request having been made since the present appellant had neglected to pay the amount, a statutory notice was served on 01.04.2014, calling upon to clear the balance amount, as indicated above and a specific time limit was given of 21 days. It was also indicated that failing to comply with the notice, the original petitioner would be entitled to file winding-up proceedings against the present appellant. To this statutory notice, a general denial is made by present appellant by way of a communication dated 05.04.2014, denying the averments made in the statutory notice and since without any justification and also without any bona fides evasive reply was filed and a further communication was also written by original petitioner on 10.04.2014, through the advocate, but no reply was received by the original petitioner from present appellant company which has resulted into filing of the winding-up petition which was numbered as Company Petition No. 245 of 2014 before this Court.

2.2 The said winding-up petition was heard by the learned Company Court i.e. learned Single Judge and after hearing both the sides, learned Company Court was pleased to pass impugned order on 06.01.2016 whereby the Company Petition for winding-up came to be admitted and consequential process was also ordered to be carried out. The operative part of the said order reads as under:

“29. Hence, the following order:

30. Admit.

31. The Registry is directed to notify the present petition for final hearing on 10.03.2016. The admission of the petition shall be advertis