<?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>1999 (9) TMI 890 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108084</link>
    <description>A winding-up petition cannot be sustained merely because disputed interest remains unpaid where the company has already paid the principal and demonstrated ability to meet its admitted liability. The dispute over interest is a matter for ordinary civil adjudication, not a basis for invoking winding-up jurisdiction. Winding up is a serious, discretionary remedy intended for the collective benefit of creditors and cannot be used as a substitute for recovery proceedings. Where the dispute is bona fide and payment of the principal is undisputed, non-payment of interest alone does not justify winding up; the petitioner must pursue civil remedies.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 16:46:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=145101" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (9) TMI 890 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108084</link>
      <description>A winding-up petition cannot be sustained merely because disputed interest remains unpaid where the company has already paid the principal and demonstrated ability to meet its admitted liability. The dispute over interest is a matter for ordinary civil adjudication, not a basis for invoking winding-up jurisdiction. Winding up is a serious, discretionary remedy intended for the collective benefit of creditors and cannot be used as a substitute for recovery proceedings. Where the dispute is bona fide and payment of the principal is undisputed, non-payment of interest alone does not justify winding up; the petitioner must pursue civil remedies.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108084</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>