<?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>1990 (10) TMI 285 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102076</link>
    <description>Whether a company may defeat a winding up petition by raising a bona fide dispute over the debt was assessed under the Companies Act framework requiring a statutory demand; the core legal principle applied is that a petitioning creditor is ordinarily entitled to winding up ex debito justitiae where an unpaid debt is shown, but an established bona fide and substantial dispute, prima facie substantiated, will defeat the petition. Here the company failed to produce prima facie documentary or witness evidence to substantiate discharge of debt; the single judge&#039;s conditional dismissal was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh enquiry with directions including furnishing security.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Oct 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 16:23:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139125" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (10) TMI 285 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102076</link>
      <description>Whether a company may defeat a winding up petition by raising a bona fide dispute over the debt was assessed under the Companies Act framework requiring a statutory demand; the core legal principle applied is that a petitioning creditor is ordinarily entitled to winding up ex debito justitiae where an unpaid debt is shown, but an established bona fide and substantial dispute, prima facie substantiated, will defeat the petition. Here the company failed to produce prima facie documentary or witness evidence to substantiate discharge of debt; the single judge&#039;s conditional dismissal was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh enquiry with directions including furnishing security.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Oct 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102076</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>