Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2009 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (4) TMI 458 - HC - Companies LawWinding up petition - whether liability said to be "admitted liability" is not the "admitted liability" of the respondent-company? Held that:- It is evident that the defence as set out in the counter affidavit is not in good faith and has got no substance. No material has been placed on record in support of the defence as set out in the counter affidavit to show that any bona fide dispute has been raised by the respondent-company. Repeated opportunities, as detailed above, was granted to the respondent-company to pay the debt. More than six months have passed but the respondent-company has not been able to clear its admitted liability. Looked from any angle and taking the case of the respondent-company on its face value with regard to the payments made by it from time to time including the payments made during the course of pendency of the present proceedings before this court, under the orders of this court, it is evident that the respondent-company has not been able to discharge its admitted liability which as it stands today, comes to ₹ 31,05,717 minus ₹ 14,67,728 (paid during pendency of the present proceedings) = ₹ 16,37,989. In any view of the matter, there is no doubt that the respondent-company owes the petitioner-company of the debt entitling it to a winding up order.
|