https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246219 A genuine hire-purchase arrangement was treated as distinct from a loan, so the Bombay Money-Lenders Act did not defeat the winding-up petition. The statutory notice was upheld because it was sent to the address reflected in the company's own reply and records, despite a contrary unsupported assertion about the registered office. Limitation was not a bar because the claim was filed within time on the relevant defaults. The existence of an arbitral award did not prevent the creditor from pursuing winding-up proceedings, and alleged vehicle defects did not excuse non-payment where the agreement made instalments unconditional and allocated defect risk to the hirer. en-us Tue, 01 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Apr 2014 11:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246219 A genuine hire-purchase arrangement was treated as distinct from a loan, so the Bombay Money-Lenders Act did not defeat the winding-up petition. The statutory notice was upheld because it was sent to the address reflected in the company's own reply and records, despite a contrary unsupported assertion about the registered office. Limitation was not a bar because the claim was filed within time on the relevant defaults. The existence of an arbitral award did not prevent the creditor from pursuing winding-up proceedings, and alleged vehicle defects did not excuse non-payment where the agreement made instalments unconditional and allocated defect risk to the hirer. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 01 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246219