https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358053 An admitted debtor cannot resist winding-up by pointing to payment made by the creditor's insurer under a separate insurance contract to which the debtor was not a party. The company had already acknowledged the debt in a consent order and agreed to pay it in instalments, so the insurer-payment defence did not extinguish the admitted liability. Any issues of subrogation, assignment, or recovery between insurer and insured were treated as separate and could not defeat the creditor's claim against the company. Where the company defaulted under the self-operative consent order and showed no legally sustainable defence, the winding-up order was maintained. en-us Mon, 02 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Apr 2018 11:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358053 An admitted debtor cannot resist winding-up by pointing to payment made by the creditor's insurer under a separate insurance contract to which the debtor was not a party. The company had already acknowledged the debt in a consent order and agreed to pay it in instalments, so the insurer-payment defence did not extinguish the admitted liability. Any issues of subrogation, assignment, or recovery between insurer and insured were treated as separate and could not defeat the creditor's claim against the company. Where the company defaulted under the self-operative consent order and showed no legally sustainable defence, the winding-up order was maintained. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 02 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358053