https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111071 A winding up petition under the Companies Act, 1956 is not maintainable where the debt is subject to a bona fide and substantial dispute, including disputes over quality, contractual acceptance conditions, and liability under the supply terms. The court treated the respondent's partial payments and court deposit as supporting commercial solvency, so the statutory presumption of inability to pay was not attracted. It also held that a mere failure to reply to a notice under section 433 does not by itself create liability or trigger the deeming provision under section 434. Winding up jurisdiction cannot be used as a substitute for ordinary recovery proceedings where the claim is genuinely contested. en-us Tue, 12 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Apr 2012 12:02:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111071 A winding up petition under the Companies Act, 1956 is not maintainable where the debt is subject to a bona fide and substantial dispute, including disputes over quality, contractual acceptance conditions, and liability under the supply terms. The court treated the respondent's partial payments and court deposit as supporting commercial solvency, so the statutory presumption of inability to pay was not attracted. It also held that a mere failure to reply to a notice under section 433 does not by itself create liability or trigger the deeming provision under section 434. Winding up jurisdiction cannot be used as a substitute for ordinary recovery proceedings where the claim is genuinely contested. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 12 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111071