Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the respondent's objection that the petitioner should have sold the pledged shares before demanding the balance debt constituted a bona fide defence to the winding-up petition under sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956.
Analysis: The petition was based on an unpaid loan and a statutory notice that had elicited a reply undertaking staged payment. The agreement showed that the petitioner had power to sell the pledged shares, but the power was not mandatory. The respondent had not raised this objection in reply to the statutory notice and had instead undertaken to pay the balance. On that basis, the defence was not treated as bona fide.
Outcome: The respondent was directed to deposit the claimed amount in court within the stipulated time, and the petitioner was directed to deposit the pledged shares. The winding-up petition was to stand disposed of if the amount was deposited, and was to stand admitted if the deposit was not made.