https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239264 The High Court of Calcutta found the company's defense dishonest and lacking basis, ruling in favor of the petitioning creditor's claim for outstanding payment of over Rs.1.18 crore. Despite an attempted settlement at Rs.98 lakh, subsequent demands led to a legal confrontation. The court criticized the company for failing to produce original documents, deeming its defense implausible. The company was granted an opportunity to defend by providing security. The court clarified that an arbitration clause did not bar adjudication, emphasizing the need for valid documentation and timely responses to legal notices for a fair resolution. en-us Mon, 06 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 Nov 2013 10:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239264 The High Court of Calcutta found the company's defense dishonest and lacking basis, ruling in favor of the petitioning creditor's claim for outstanding payment of over Rs.1.18 crore. Despite an attempted settlement at Rs.98 lakh, subsequent demands led to a legal confrontation. The court criticized the company for failing to produce original documents, deeming its defense implausible. The company was granted an opportunity to defend by providing security. The court clarified that an arbitration clause did not bar adjudication, emphasizing the need for valid documentation and timely responses to legal notices for a fair resolution. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 06 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239264