https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108643 The court declined to wind up the company due to the presence of a bona fide dispute and substantial defense raised by the respondent regarding defective supplies. It held that the pending civil suit did not preclude the winding up petition. The existence of an arbitration clause was deemed not to bar the court's jurisdiction in winding up petitions. The respondent's failure to respond to the statutory notice did not automatically lead to winding up orders. The court considered the company's financial health and disputed claims, directing the respondent to make deposits to resolve the matter, emphasizing the equitable considerations in winding up proceedings. en-us Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Apr 2012 11:55:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108643 The court declined to wind up the company due to the presence of a bona fide dispute and substantial defense raised by the respondent regarding defective supplies. It held that the pending civil suit did not preclude the winding up petition. The existence of an arbitration clause was deemed not to bar the court's jurisdiction in winding up petitions. The respondent's failure to respond to the statutory notice did not automatically lead to winding up orders. The court considered the company's financial health and disputed claims, directing the respondent to make deposits to resolve the matter, emphasizing the equitable considerations in winding up proceedings. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108643