https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196087 A debtor cannot resist winding up on the basis of a plea of disputed debt that has already been rejected and is inconsistent with admitted settlement liabilities, rehabilitation terms, and payment records; the defence was found not bona fide and winding up was sustained. A writ challenge to measures taken under the SARFAESI Act was not maintainable because the secured creditors had already proceeded under Section 13, leaving the borrower to the statutory remedy under Section 17 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. Repeated collateral proceedings on the same grievance were treated as an abuse of process, so the writ petition failed. en-us Thu, 16 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Nov 2017 14:25:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196087 A debtor cannot resist winding up on the basis of a plea of disputed debt that has already been rejected and is inconsistent with admitted settlement liabilities, rehabilitation terms, and payment records; the defence was found not bona fide and winding up was sustained. A writ challenge to measures taken under the SARFAESI Act was not maintainable because the secured creditors had already proceeded under Section 13, leaving the borrower to the statutory remedy under Section 17 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. Repeated collateral proceedings on the same grievance were treated as an abuse of process, so the writ petition failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 16 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196087