https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216936 The court dismissed the petition seeking winding up of the respondent Company under Sections 433(e) and (f) of the Companies Act, 1956, due to unpaid amounts in the Share Application Money Account and an unsecured loan. The petitioner, a former Promoter and Director, failed to prove the respondent's non-compliance with repayment demands, with the court rejecting claims of outstanding debt and improper share allotment. The court emphasized the need for clear evidence and timelines in debt repayment disputes, ultimately ruling in favor of the respondent due to lack of substantiation by the petitioner. en-us Mon, 02 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216936 The court dismissed the petition seeking winding up of the respondent Company under Sections 433(e) and (f) of the Companies Act, 1956, due to unpaid amounts in the Share Application Money Account and an unsecured loan. The petitioner, a former Promoter and Director, failed to prove the respondent's non-compliance with repayment demands, with the court rejecting claims of outstanding debt and improper share allotment. The court emphasized the need for clear evidence and timelines in debt repayment disputes, ultimately ruling in favor of the respondent due to lack of substantiation by the petitioner. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 02 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216936