{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff37\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f37\fswiss\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 020f0502020204030204}Calibri;}{\f186\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f187\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f189\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f190\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f191\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew){\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f192\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic){\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f193\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f194\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese){\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f556\fswiss\fcharset238\fprq2 Calibri CE;}{\f557\fswiss\fcharset204\fprq2 Calibri Cyr;}{\f559\fswiss\fcharset161\fprq2 Calibri Greek;}{\f560\fswiss\fcharset162\fprq2 Calibri Tur;}{\f563\fswiss\fcharset186\fprq2 Calibri Baltic;}}
{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255;\red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;
\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0;\red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;}{\stylesheet{\qj \fi-2160\li2160\ri0\sa200\sl276\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin2160\itap0 
\f37\fs22\lang3081\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp1033 \snext0 \styrsid14886623 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\*
\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv 
\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{
\s15\qj \fi-2160\li2160\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin2160\itap0 \f37\fs22\lang3081\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp1033 \snext15 \styrsid14886623 No Spacing;}{\s16\qj \fi-2160\li2160\ri0\sa200\sl276\slmult1\widctlpar
\tqc\tx4513\tqr\tx9026\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin2160\itap0 \f37\fs22\lang3081\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext16 \slink17 \ssemihidden \styrsid14886623 header;}{\*\cs17 \additive 
\fs22\lang3081\langfe1033\loch\f37\hich\af37\dbch\af0\langnp3081\langfenp1033 \sbasedon10 \slink16 \slocked \ssemihidden \styrsid14886623 Char Char1;}{\s18\qj \fi-2160\li2160\ri0\sa200\sl276\slmult1\widctlpar
\tqc\tx4513\tqr\tx9026\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin2160\itap0 \f37\fs22\lang3081\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext18 \slink19 \styrsid14886623 footer;}{\*\cs19 \additive 
\fs22\lang3081\langfe1033\loch\f37\hich\af37\dbch\af0\langnp3081\langfenp1033 \sbasedon10 \slink18 \slocked \styrsid14886623 Char Char;}}{\*\latentstyles\lsdstimax156\lsdlockeddef0}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid811014\rsid862776\rsid1598413\rsid1972231\rsid2193419
\rsid2309175\rsid2371452\rsid2504626\rsid2506087\rsid3176464\rsid3422714\rsid3810279\rsid3822112\rsid3831056\rsid4160285\rsid4329331\rsid4331392\rsid4744076\rsid4815830\rsid4855016\rsid4931203\rsid5052173\rsid5062183\rsid5123780\rsid5592493\rsid5643559
\rsid5923195\rsid6060947\rsid6160848\rsid6514138\rsid6782860\rsid6953338\rsid7366506\rsid7483118\rsid7958375\rsid8016262\rsid8083724\rsid8270074\rsid8524331\rsid8598875\rsid8790013\rsid8866877\rsid9189166\rsid9452663\rsid9455426\rsid9776131\rsid9988493
\rsid10712439\rsid10749241\rsid11014019\rsid11292607\rsid11355540\rsid11404427\rsid11880640\rsid11928628\rsid12063525\rsid12081942\rsid12211158\rsid12921552\rsid12931985\rsid12983114\rsid13198352\rsid13381956\rsid14055906\rsid14105686\rsid14108652
\rsid14496123\rsid14510136\rsid14695321\rsid14886623\rsid14967201\rsid15032169\rsid15159555\rsid15297671\rsid15405516\rsid15541791\rsid15560408\rsid15864576\rsid15945946\rsid16592213\rsid16597937\rsid16671932}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 11.0.5604;}{\info
{\title \'93this is a quote, has said, of me saying \'91this is a quote\'92\'94}{\author ruddley_e}{\operator freriks_k}{\creatim\yr2010\mo9\dy29\hr10\min1}{\revtim\yr2010\mo10\dy9\hr9\min47}{\version2}{\edmins8}{\nofpages4}{\nofwords1899}{\nofchars10828}
{\*\company PacLII}{\nofcharsws12702}{\vern24689}}\paperw11906\paperh16838\margl1440\margr1440 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\hyphcaps0\formshade\horzdoc\dgmargin\dghspace180\dgvspace180\dghorigin1440
\dgvorigin1440\dghshow1\dgvshow1\jexpand\viewkind4\viewscale100\pgbrdrhead\pgbrdrfoot\splytwnine\ftnlytwnine\htmautsp\nolnhtadjtbl\useltbaln\alntblind\lytcalctblwd\lyttblrtgr\lnbrkrule\nobrkwrptbl\snaptogridincell\allowfieldendsel\wrppunct
\asianbrkrule\rsidroot14886623\newtblstyruls\nogrowautofit \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \qj \fi-2160\li2160\ri0\sa200\sl276\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin2160\itap0 \f37\fs22\lang3081\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp1033 
{\insrsid9988493 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \qj \fi-2160\li2160\ri0\sa200\sl276\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin2160\itap0 \f37\fs22\lang3081\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp1033 {\insrsid9988493 \chftnsepc 
\par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \qj \fi-2160\li2160\ri0\sa200\sl276\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin2160\itap0 \f37\fs22\lang3081\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp1033 {\insrsid9988493 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \qj \fi-2160\li2160\ri0\sa200\sl276\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin2160\itap0 \f37\fs22\lang3081\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp1033 {\insrsid9988493 \chftnsepc 
\par }}\sectd \linex0\headery708\footery708\colsx708\endnhere\sectlinegrid360\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid5923195\sftnbj {\footer \pard\plain \s18\qc \fi-2160\li2160\ri0\sa200\sl276\slmult1\widctlpar
\tqc\tx4513\tqr\tx9026\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin2160\itap0 \f37\fs22\lang3081\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp1033 {\field{\*\fldinst {\insrsid13381956  PAGE   \\* MERGEFORMAT }}{\fldrslt {\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid9988493 
4}}}{\insrsid13381956 
\par }\pard \s18\qj \fi-2160\li2160\ri0\sa200\sl276\slmult1\widctlpar\tqc\tx4513\tqr\tx9026\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin2160\itap0 {\insrsid13381956 
\par }}{\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}}
{\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8
\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14886623 
\f37\fs22\lang3081\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp1033 {\b\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 IN THE HIGH COURT of FIJI at LABASA
\par COMPANIES JURISDICTION
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14886623 {\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14886623 {\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 WINDING UP CAUSE No: 110 of 2009
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14886623 {\f0\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14886623 {\b\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 IN THE MATTER of GOUNDER INVESTMENT LIMITED}{
\b\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9988493 
\par }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 a limited liability company }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9988493 having its registered Office at
\par }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 Anand Prasad Complex. Vulovi, Labasa Fiji.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14886623 {\f0\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14886623 {\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 AND
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14886623 {\f0\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14886623 {\b\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 IN THE MATTER}{
\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  of the Companies Act.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14886623 {\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
\par Before: Master H Robinson
\par Counsels:}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623  }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 : No appearance for the Petitioner
\par : Mr. Sen of Macbool & Co. for the Respondent
\par }{\f0\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14886623 {\b\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 RULING
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14886623 {\f0\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 INTRODUCTION
\par }\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14886623 \f37\fs22\lang3081\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp1033 {\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
On the 30 September 2009 the petitioner, Flour Mills of Fiji presented a petition to the office of the Acting Chief Registrar of the High Court, Suva
 to wind up Gounder Investment Limited. Gounder Investment Limited is a limited liability company having its registered office at Anand Prasad Complex Vulovi, Labasa. 
\par 
\par The basis of the presentation of the petition is an alleged debt to the sum of $44,749:59 in respect of }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 Trade Account}{
\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  rendered to Gounder Investment Limited. The petitioner claims that the said }{
\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 Gounder Investment Limited is unable to pay its debt and should therefore be wound up. 
\par 
\par In accordance with Rule 22 (1) of the Companies (Winding Up) Rules the Acting Chief Registrar appointed that the petition is to be heard at the High Court in Suva on Wednesday the 18 day of November 2009 at 11 O}{
\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 '}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 clock in the forenoon. There is no record on the file that the petition was heard on the appointed da
te of 18 November only that it was heard before the then Chief Registrar on the 2 December 2009 at which point an application was made to transfer the matter to the High Court at Labasa. The transfer of the file to Labasa was eventually granted by Justice
 Hettiarachchi on the 3 March 2010.
\par 
\par Contrary to the mandatory requirement under Rule 25 of the Companies (Winding Up) Rulesthat the }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
Verification of the Petition}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  is to be filed }{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
within}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  4 days after the petition is 
presented, the affidavit verifying the petition was filed on the 9 October 2009, that is some 10 days after. No leave to extend the time frame under Rule 201 was made by the petitioner, although this issue was not decisive in this instance.
\par 
\par The petition was served on the respondent company on the 23 October 2009 and its }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 Memorandum of Due Compliance}{
\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  on the 17 November 2009 and was ready for the hearing of the petition at the appointed date of 18 November 2009.
\par 
\par The respondent company filed its affidavit i
n opposition on the 5 November 2009 and when the matter was called on the 2 December 2009 the petitioner requested to be given 21 days to file a reply to the affidavit in opposition and the matter adjourned to the 27 January 2010. The petitioner}{
\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 '}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 s affidavi
t in reply was filed on the 27 January 2010 and the matter adjourned to 17 February 2010 and thereafter adjourned for hearing before a judge on the 3 March 2010. On the 3 March 2010 the matter was transferred to Labasa High Court where it came before the 
Master. After two further appearances the matter was adjourned for hearing on the 1 September 2010.
\par 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid9988493 HEARING
\par }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
\par At the hearing of the petition the petitioner did not appear to prove the debt. The opposition to the petition now being unchallenged the Court is left with no alternative but to deny the application. 
\par 
\par Some matters however, need to be clarified regarding the content of the affidavits filed by both parties in respect of this application. Rule 25 enables the petitioner to verify the petition through a
n affidavit. This particular affidavit has attracted a lot of attention and legal debate since its inclusion as evidence of the contents of the petition. Much care must therefore be taken by petitioners in the preparation of and the establishment of the t
ruth of the information contained in statutory affidavits required to verify a petition of this nature. This is because it is sworn and accepted as prima facie evidence of the contents of the petition.
\par 
\par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14886623 \f37\fs22\lang3081\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp1033 {\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
The form of the affidavit verifying the petition can be found in 2nd Edition of the }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 Atkins Court Forms}{
\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
 forms Nos 279 to 281. The basis of the affidavit is that the deponent swears that the statement in the petition which relate to the acts and deeds of the petitioner are true. Unless the deponent is a Solic
itor acting for the petitioner, in most cases the deponent has acquired these information through the acts of a third party and to which the deponent has no direct knowledge. In other words this affidavit at best is hearsay evidence. What then is the lega
l
 rationale behind its acceptance as prima facie evidence for a petition which may result in the termination of an entity to function as a company? The answer to this question may be found in an analysis of the seven grounds for winding up a company under 
section 220 of the Companies Act, Cap. 247. 
\par 
\par Four of the grounds of winding up a company are grounds which relate to the function or non function of the company as an entity. That is they are grounds which changes the texture or the structure of the compan
y which may result in the company being unable to function properly or effectively. For example where by special resolution the company has resolved that the company be wound up or it has defaulted in delivering its statutory report or holding a meeting o
r
 has not commenced its business within a year of incorporation or there is a reduction in its membership or where winding up proceedings have commenced in the territory of its incorporation . These grounds can be classified as relating to what I call the 
}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 mechanics}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{
\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  of the company which enables it to function, therefore the petitions and the }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{
\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 affidavits verifying}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
 them which are presented under these heads can easily be dealt with summarily and the acceptance of hearsay evidence as to its contents may attract some justification. }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 
\par }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
\par However the ground that }{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 the company is unable to pay its debt }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 and the ground which can}{
\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623  }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 attract the }{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
opinion of the court to wind up a company}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  should in my view be treated differently as far as the affidavit verifying the petition is
 concerned. This is because the evidence required are of a different nature which requires oral evidence to be given and in doing so normal rules of evidence would apply. This approach takes into account that the company is functioning and that a winding 
up petition is a drastic step taken to terminate its existence as a legal entity. 
\par 
\par However the rule regarding affidavits verifying the petition is a statutory rule and no decisions of the court can modify its effect although, in my view, attempts have been
 made by the Courts to limit its acceptance as evidence by questioning the evidentiary values of the contents of the affidavit. Justice Warrington In }{\i\f0\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
re African Farms Limited (1906) 1 Ch 640}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  stated at p. 642 that}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 :}{
\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 -}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 
\par }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid9988493 {\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
The rule is merely directory as to the kind of affidavit to be accepted as evidence. That leaves it open to the Court, in a proper case, to accept an affidavit which in an ordinary case coming before the Court would be accepted as evidence}{
\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 .}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  Justice Buckley in }{
\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 re }{\i\f0\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 ABC Coupler & Engineering Co Ltd (No:2) (1962) 1 WLR at }{
\f0\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 1243}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  in accepting that the effect of the rule was that a petition might be }{
\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 sufficiently verified by what was hearsay evidence or worse, but verifying a petition was one thing and establishing
 a sufficient case to justify making a winding up order was another}{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
. While Justice Buckley did not entirely reject the possibility of there being a case in which the Court would be satisfied with hearsay evidence he indicated considerable doubt about this
 and preferred rather the use of evidence which conform to the ordinary rules of evidence. See also }{\i\f0\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 Re Travel and Holiday Clubs Ltd (1967) 1 WLR 799}{
\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 .}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14886623 {\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
\par Master Udit in }{\i\f0\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 Re Comsol Fij Ltd (2009) FJHC 77}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
 when faced with the preliminary argument about the acceptance of }{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 viva voce}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
 evidence in a petition based on the company being unable to pay its debt sought direction from the decision of His Lordship Justice Gates in }{\i\f0\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
Re Kim Industries Limited, Lautoka High Court Winding Up Action No. HBF 36/96.}{\f0\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
His Lordship there, stated that although winding up proceedings often proceed on affidavit evidence alone, }{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 viva voce}{
\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  evidence is admissible.
\par 
\par In the present case the petition consists of two statements. The first sta
tement relates to the company as a legal entity with a nominal capital divided into shares and the details of the companies purpose and object. The second and more important of the two refers to a statutory demand notice pursuant to section 221 of the Com
panies Act. Non compliance of the payment of the alleged debt on the }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 notice}{
\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
 will result on the petition being presented to wind up the company. It is important to note that the affidavits verifying a petition only verifies the statement being made as it r
elates to the acts and deeds of the petitioner to enable it to present a petition but it does not verify the truth contained in those statements. This is an important distinction.
\par 
\par The section 221 notice in the present case states }{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 ...the Creditor Flour Mi
lls of Fiji ...claims that the Company (Gounder Investment Limited) owe to it the sum of $44,749:59 (Fourty four thousand seven hundred and fourty nine dollars and fifty nine cents) ... being the amount due and owing by you in respect of Trade Account ren
dered to your company, }{\b\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 details whereof are well known to the company }{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 (emphasis mine) ...}{
\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
Although section 221 does not prescribe the way in which a demand notice is made accept that a debt is to be paid within a certain period of time, the demand notice it
self is not proof of debt. A demand notice which does not include the details or particulars of the alleged debt can attract a general denial from the respondent. In this scenario the expectation that the court accept the conclusions of the petitioner as 
its own should not be accepted without further evidence. As Master Udit commented in }{\i\f0\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 Re Comsol Fiji Ltd}{
\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  }{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
 Since the notice is a pivotal document, in my view all necessary details must be contained in/or attached to the notice. }{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 
\par }{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
\par This in turn will provoke a substantive response from the company instead of getting engrossed in several follow up correspondences to and fro}{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623  }{
\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 seeking detail.}{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623  "}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
In reply to the petition the respondent company states that every invoice rendered has been satisfied and that they had neve
r purchased goods from the petitioner for the sum claimed. Given the lack of particulars in the demand notice any general denial by the respondent creates a doubt on the alleged debt and puts unnecessary pressure on the summary nature of the petition to w
ind up a company.}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623  }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
Has the petitioner then, in this instance, satisfied the fundamental requirement that there is debt? I am of the view that the petitioner has not satisfied that requirement if it creates a statement of debt which casts a doubt to the exist
ence of that very debt. Hence an omission by a company to comply with a statutory demand which is lacking in the necessary particulars may not amount to a neglect to comply with the statutory demand. The demand could therefore be seen as being without sub
stance and needs further investigation. In }{\i\f0\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 Mann & Anor}{\i\f0\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623  }{
\i\f0\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 \endash v- Goldstein & Anor (1968) 2 All E.R.769}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  it was held that }{
\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  }{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
As the existence of the debt on which each winding up petition was founded was disputed on grounds showing a substantial defence requiring 
investigation, the petitioner did not establish that he was a creditor and thus had the locus standi to present the petition...accordingly the presentation of the petition was an abuse of the process of the Court}{
\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 .}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  
\par 
\par Therefore I am of the view that the use of phrases such as }{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 the details whereof are well known to the company}{
\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  or }{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{
\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 the company is aware of the particulars of the debt}{\i\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 "}{
\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  when used in s.221 notices are not particular enough to establish the existence of a debt and therefore form the basis upon whi
ch a petition is presented to wind up a company. Proper functioning companies have a paper trail generated from within identifying every sale or purchase and providing the particulars in a section 221 notice does more to proving that a company cannot pay 
i
ts debt than a general statement like those referred to above. It is important to consider this point because even if the quantum is wrong but the particulars are right, the Court may still make an order. That is, a dispute as to the amount of indebtednes
s to a petitioning creditor but not the existence of the indebtedness is sufficient to entitle the petitioner to a winding up order; }{\i\f0\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 
Re Tweeds Garages Ltd., (1962) 1 All E.R. 121 at 776.}{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623  
\par 
\par For the above reasons together with the fact that the petitioner did not attend the hearing to provide further evidence proving the debt, the petition to wind up the company is dismissed with costs which I summarily assess in the sum of $750:00. 
\par 
\par Accordingly so ordered.
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14886623 {\b\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 H A ROBINSON
\par MASTER of the HIGH COURT
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14886623 {\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623 
\par }{\f0\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14886623\charrsid14886623 20 September 2010.
\par }}