<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1966 (12) TMI 38 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98375</link>
    <description>Whether petitioners were creditors and whether the company&#039;s denial constituted a bona fide dispute: the court held the entries, renewal/acceptance letters and board resolution amounted to acknowledgements of liability, restarting limitation and showing the deposit was payable on demand; the company&#039;s denial was found not bona fide but dishonest. Because the company had ceased business and opponents failed to show creditor benefit from continuation, the petitioners were treated as creditors and the winding-up petition was allowed in their favour.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Dec 1966 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 13:15:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=135432" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1966 (12) TMI 38 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98375</link>
      <description>Whether petitioners were creditors and whether the company&#039;s denial constituted a bona fide dispute: the court held the entries, renewal/acceptance letters and board resolution amounted to acknowledgements of liability, restarting limitation and showing the deposit was payable on demand; the company&#039;s denial was found not bona fide but dishonest. Because the company had ceased business and opponents failed to show creditor benefit from continuation, the petitioners were treated as creditors and the winding-up petition was allowed in their favour.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Dec 1966 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98375</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>