Judgment ( 1. ) IT is a company petition filed under Section 433 (c) of the Companies Act by the petitioner seeking winding up of the respondent Company. It is not in dispute being a matter of record that this Court has already entertained and admitted one company petition being Company Petition 35 of 1997 (Bank of India v. Earnest Health Care Limited) by order dated 28. 8. 2000 against this very company for its winding up. In that petition, a direction to advertise the petition in terms of Company Court Rules are also issued for compliance to enable this Court to proceed ahead. ( 2. ) IN a situation like the one where this Court has already entertained one Company Petition for winding up of the same Company referred supra and also made direction for its advertisement enabling all the creditors to submit their claims, there is no need to entertain and keep this petition pending for the reason that petitioner can and rather has to submit all his/their grievances which they may have against the respondent Company in a Company Petition No. 35 of 1997. This Court will have to examine the claims of all creditors in Company Petition No. 35 of 1997 because once any Company Petition is admitted and advertised in terms of Rules against the Company then it ceases to be a petition on behalf of one petitioner but it becomes a petition for and on behalf of several creditors in its representative capacity who have a claim against the Company (in liquidation ). The petitioner can have no grievance because this Court has granted liberty to raise their grievance/claim in a Company Petition No. 35 of 1997 for its adjudication. After all, this petitioner is also asking for the same relief i. e. winding up of the same respondent Company which is already being considered in Company Petition No. 35 of 1997. ( 3. ) ACCORDINGLY and in view of aforesaid discussion I dismiss this Company Petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to submit their claim/grievances by making an appropriate application in Company Petition No. 35 of 1997.