1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Court dismisses winding-up petition, ruling in favor of respondent. Cheque intended for loan repayment. Petitioner's claims rejected.</h1> The court dismissed the winding-up petition, ruling in favor of the respondent. The court accepted the respondent's defense that the cheque issued was ... Winding up - Circumstances in which a company may be wound up Issues:1. Dispute over payment of consideration for a plot transfer.2. Allegations of non-payment of dues by the respondent.3. Interpretation of cheque issuance towards loan repayment or director fees.Issue 1:The petitioner filed a winding-up petition against the respondent, alleging non-payment of consideration for a plot transfer as per an agreement. The respondent issued cheques totaling Rs. 3,75,000, with an understanding that a significant amount was kept as a loan without interest for at least fifteen months. The respondent also made payments towards dues of RIICO, leaving a balance of Rs. 3,18,218 as a loan. Both parties disagreed on whether the cheque issued was towards loan repayment or directors' fees, petrol expenses, etc.Issue 2:Despite statutory notice and attempts to recover the amount, the respondent failed to pay its debts, leading to the winding-up petition. The respondent claimed that the amount kept as a loan was repaid through a cheque encashed by the petitioner, including the loan amount and advance. The court had to determine the actual nature of the cheque issued by the respondent and whether it was towards loan repayment or other expenses.Issue 3:The court examined the agreement between the parties regarding payment to directors and other expenses. It was disputed whether there was a formal agreement for such payments. The respondent's defense was that the cheque issued was towards loan repayment, while the petitioner argued it was for directors' fees, petrol expenses, etc. The court emphasized the need for clear evidence of any agreement for payment of additional expenses to directors.The judgment dismissed the winding-up petition, citing the respondent's defense that the cheque issued was towards loan repayment. The court highlighted the lack of concrete evidence regarding agreements for additional payments to directors, leading to the rejection of the petitioner's claims. The court awarded costs of Rs. 3,000 to the respondent.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
