Mere entries in books of account, even if kept in regular course of business, are insufficient to establish liability for payment of goods without further evidence of receipt of goods by the person sought to be made liable.

1. This is a claim petition filed by the Official Liquidator on behalf of M/s. Hada Steel Products Limited (now in liquidation) and hereinafter called the Company under S.446(2) read with S. 468 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short, the Act) for the recovery of Rs.1, 14,298.81ps. along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from 15-6-1987 till the date of payment.

2. It is common case of the parties that the Company before it went into liquidation was supplying mechanical and engineering goods to M/s. Emjay Engineering Enterprises, Bombay-respondent herein. The Company was ordered to be wound up on 14-5-1987 and the Official Liquidator attached to this Court was appointed its liquidator. On receipt of records from the ex-Directors of the company, the Official Liquidator found that a sum of Rs.1, 14,298.81ps. was due to the Company from the respondent being the unpaid price of the goods supplied by the former to the latter. The Official Liquidator served a registered notice on the respondent calling upon it to pay the amount. The respondent sent its reply denying its liability to pay any amount and also pointed out to the Official Liquidator that the statement of account on which he was placing reliance was not correct and that it contained a number of clerical/arithmetical errors. It was also brought to his notice that as per that statement of account only a sum of Rs. 3398.56 ps. was due from the Company to the respondent. In the replication filed by the Official Liquidator, it was stated that the Company had maintained two accounts in its books in the name of the respondent and those accounts were described as an old account and a new account. It was clarified that the statement of account which was annexed as Annexure-P1 with the petition pertained to the new account and the entries prior to those referred to therein were contained in the old account a copy of which was attached as Annexure-P2 with the replication. According to the Official Liquidator, in terms of both these accounts, a sum of Rs. 1,14,298.81 ps. was due to the Company from the respondent. It is on the basis of this record of accounts that the present petition has been filed for the recovery of the amount.

3. Pleadings of the parties gave rise to the following issues: -

1. Whether the petitioner company is entitled to recover an amount of Rs.1, 14,298.81ps. together with interest at the rate of 12% per annum on account of goods supplied to the respondent as claimed in the petition? OPP 2. Relief.

4. In support of his claim for the recovery of the aforesaid amount, the Official Liquidator has produced ten invoices on the record through which the goods are said to have been sent by the Company to the respondent. These invoices are Ex.PW2/1 to PW2/10 and the total price of the goods mentioned in all these invoices comes to Rs. 98,976.20 ps. Further, ledger account as maintained by the Company in its books of account in the name of the respondent has also been produced and these are Exs.PW2/11-A, PW2/12, PW2/13, PW2/13-A, PW2/14 and PW2/14-A. Besides this, the Official Liquidator produced and assistant from his office who appeared as PW1 and on the basis of the records of the Company he stated that a sum of Rs. 1,14,298.81ps. was due to the Company from the respondent for which a notice has been sent and in spite of that the amount had not been paid. Shri M. L. Chomal who was the Chief Accountant of the Company appeared as PW2. He proved the ten invoices and also the ledger account referred to above. He admitted that the goods were sent to the respondent through the bank and payment was also made through the bank. He also admitted in his cross-examination that the payments against some of the aforesaid invoices had been received and the same stand reflected in the books of the Company. The respondent, on the other hand, has admitted invoices Exs. PW2/1 to PW2/9 and it has also admitted receipt of goods mentioned therein. The case of the respondent