https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102298 An alleged oral understanding, set-off and account adjustment could not displace the written agreement and prior acknowledgments of liability, and section 92 of the Indian Evidence Act barred reliance on oral evidence to vary the contract. The company therefore failed to show a bona fide, substantial defence to resist winding up. The court also treated the debt as undisputed, noted dishonoured cheques and non-compliance with statutory demand, and held that the conditions for winding up were satisfied under the Companies Act, 1956. The petition succeeded and the company was ordered to be wound up with the Official Liquidator appointed. en-us Fri, 20 Nov 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Feb 2012 13:24:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102298 An alleged oral understanding, set-off and account adjustment could not displace the written agreement and prior acknowledgments of liability, and section 92 of the Indian Evidence Act barred reliance on oral evidence to vary the contract. The company therefore failed to show a bona fide, substantial defence to resist winding up. The court also treated the debt as undisputed, noted dishonoured cheques and non-compliance with statutory demand, and held that the conditions for winding up were satisfied under the Companies Act, 1956. The petition succeeded and the company was ordered to be wound up with the Official Liquidator appointed. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 20 Nov 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102298