https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243411 A winding-up petition was treated as founded on a Patronage Letter and admitted correspondence, not on enforcement of a foreign Turin decree. The foreign decree did not extinguish the original cause of action, merger doctrine was not applied to bar the petition, and the exclusive Turin jurisdiction clause was held inapplicable because winding-up lies before the Company Court. The Court also found that limitation, alleged FEMA breach, parallel proceedings, and commercial solvency did not establish a bona fide dispute where the debt was admitted and restructuring requests had been made before inconsistent defences were raised. A limited opportunity to deposit the claimed amount was granted to avoid admission. en-us Thu, 05 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Feb 2014 11:08:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243411 A winding-up petition was treated as founded on a Patronage Letter and admitted correspondence, not on enforcement of a foreign Turin decree. The foreign decree did not extinguish the original cause of action, merger doctrine was not applied to bar the petition, and the exclusive Turin jurisdiction clause was held inapplicable because winding-up lies before the Company Court. The Court also found that limitation, alleged FEMA breach, parallel proceedings, and commercial solvency did not establish a bona fide dispute where the debt was admitted and restructuring requests had been made before inconsistent defences were raised. A limited opportunity to deposit the claimed amount was granted to avoid admission. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 05 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243411