9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (5) TMI 206X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Ravinder Arora for the Respondent. JUDGMENT D.V. Sehgal, J.-A petition under sections 433, 434 and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter called "the Act"), filed by the appellant for winding up of the companies, respondent No. 1, was dismissed by the learned single judge, vide judgment dated November 3, 1983, (Mool Chand Wahi v. National Paints P. Ltd. [1986] 60 Comp. Cas. 198 (Punj. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 (hereinafter called "the Rules"), defines "petitions". A petition under section 439 of the Act for winding up of a company is mentioned in sub-rule (15) of the said rule. Rule 21 prescribes that every petition shall be verified by an affidavit made by the petitioner and such affidavit shall be filed along with the petition and shall be in form No. 3, which, in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t have been dismissed for want of proper verification of the affidavit. He placed reliance on Manohar Narayan Joshi v. Ramu Mhatang Patel, AIR 1973 Bom. 105. We do not find any force in this contention. Going through the judgment of the learned single judge, we find that the law on the point has been elaborately discussed and as a result an imperative conclusion has been reached that the petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y distinguished by the learned single judge as it adjudicated on the question whether or not a petitioner in an election petition under the Representation of the People Act should be allowed to amend the affidavit accompanying it. An affidavit in support of an election petition is not intended to be treated as evidence of the facts stated therein because it is ultimately to be decided on the evide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
