https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106905 The court held that directing the appellant to furnish security was not justified as the issues required evidence and should be resolved in a suit, not through a winding-up petition. The appellant was granted unconditional leave to defend without the security condition. The appeal was allowed in part, setting aside the security direction. The court found substantial disputes regarding the alleged debt, concluding that the matter should be resolved through a suit. The appeal by the petitioning creditor was dismissed, and the trial court's decision to relegate the matter to a suit was upheld, except for the security condition. en-us Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Mar 2012 12:37:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106905 The court held that directing the appellant to furnish security was not justified as the issues required evidence and should be resolved in a suit, not through a winding-up petition. The appellant was granted unconditional leave to defend without the security condition. The appeal was allowed in part, setting aside the security direction. The court found substantial disputes regarding the alleged debt, concluding that the matter should be resolved through a suit. The appeal by the petitioning creditor was dismissed, and the trial court's decision to relegate the matter to a suit was upheld, except for the security condition. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106905