https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111277 The appeal was allowed by the Supreme Court against the Company Judge's order dismissing the company petition. The Court held that the petition was not barred by limitation as the filing fell within the three-year period. The appellant's argument that a winding-up order could be made even if the exact debt amount was disputed was supported by legal precedent. The Court directed the Company Judge to proceed with the case for further consideration on merits without addressing the substantive winding-up issues at that stage. en-us Fri, 15 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Apr 2012 16:12:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111277 The appeal was allowed by the Supreme Court against the Company Judge's order dismissing the company petition. The Court held that the petition was not barred by limitation as the filing fell within the three-year period. The appellant's argument that a winding-up order could be made even if the exact debt amount was disputed was supported by legal precedent. The Court directed the Company Judge to proceed with the case for further consideration on merits without addressing the substantive winding-up issues at that stage. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 15 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111277