<?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>1979 (11) TMI 209 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99808</link>
    <description>A creditor&#039;s right to present a winding-up petition is a statutory right and was not defeated by the original creditor&#039;s death or the absence of a succession certificate at that stage. The company&#039;s defence was rejected because the admitted loans and executed promissory notes established an undisputed debt, while the claimed repayment arrangement from film collections was unsupported and treated as an afterthought, so no bona fide dispute arose. A parallel City Civil Court suit and injunction could not bar presentation of the petition because that court lacked jurisdiction to restrain it, and the injunction was treated as a nullity. The petition was maintainable and the company was unable to pay its debts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:05:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136860" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (11) TMI 209 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99808</link>
      <description>A creditor&#039;s right to present a winding-up petition is a statutory right and was not defeated by the original creditor&#039;s death or the absence of a succession certificate at that stage. The company&#039;s defence was rejected because the admitted loans and executed promissory notes established an undisputed debt, while the claimed repayment arrangement from film collections was unsupported and treated as an afterthought, so no bona fide dispute arose. A parallel City Civil Court suit and injunction could not bar presentation of the petition because that court lacked jurisdiction to restrain it, and the injunction was treated as a nullity. The petition was maintainable and the company was unable to pay its debts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99808</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>