Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (1.56 seconds)M/S.Iba Health (India) Private Ltd vs M/S.Info Drive Systems Sdn Bhd on 21 October, 2009
"23. The principles laid down in the abovementioned cases
indicate that if the debt is bona fide disputed, there cannot be
"neglect to pay" within the meaning of Section 433(1)(a) of
the Companies Act, 1956. If there is no neglect, the deeming
provision does not come into play and the winding up on the
ground that the company is unable to pay its debts is not
substantiated and non-payment of the amount of such a bona
fide disputed debt cannot be termed as "neglect to pay" so as
to incur the liability under Section 433(e) read with Section
434(1)(a) of the Companies Act, 1956."
Section 138 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
Kalra Iron Stores vs Faridabad Fabricators (P.) Ltd. on 31 October, 1990
13. Even if the legal notice in the present case was not served KRIL at its
registered office, there is no denial by KRIL that it in fact received such
notice. Also as explained by the Court in Kalra Iron Stores v. Faridadbad
Fabricators (P) Ltd, as long as IFL is able to demonstrate that there is an
admitted liability which KRIL has been unable to pay, it can pursue this
petition.
Section 439 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
State Black Sea Shipping Company And Mr. ... vs Viraj Overseas Pvt. Ltd. on 15 July, 2003
12. The above submissions have been considered. As regards the notice
under Sections 433 and 434 of the Act is concerned extensive reliance was
placed by Ms. Dhir on the observations of the Court in State Black Sea
Co. Pet. No. 329 of 2011 Page 6 of 13
Shipping Company & Mr. Joydeb Kundu v. Viraj Overseas Pvt. Ltd. In the
said decision the Court noted its earlier decision in Kalra Iron Stores v.
Faridabad Fabricators (P) Ltd. (1992) 1 Comp. L.J. 310 which drew a
distinction between a petition under Sections 433 (e) read with Section 434
(1) (a) and one under Section 433 (e) read with Section 434 (1) (c) of the
Act. It was observed that "there cannot be a dispute with regard to the
proposition that without even serving a notice as required under Section 434
(1) (a) a creditor can seek for winding up of a company under Section 433
Section 434 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 454 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Amalgamated Commercial Traders (P.) ... vs A.C.K. Krishnaswami And Anr. on 8 January, 1965
LJ 396 (Del), India Foils Limited
v. SR Voils Ltd 96 (2002) DLT 824, Amalgamated Commercial Traders
(P) Ltd. v. A.C.K. Krishnaswami [1965] 35 Comp Cas 456 (SC), IBA
Health (I) Pvt. Ltd. v. Infor-Drive Systems SDN.
Registrar Of Companies vs Navjivan Trading Finance Pvt. Ltd. on 17 August, 1977
Proxima Medical System GMBH (2005) 7 SCC 42, Medison
Communications Pvt. Ltd. v. Som Distilleries and Breweries (2005) 126
Comp Cas 786 (Del), Bhourka Steels Ltd. v. Suresh and Suresh Wires Pvt.
Ltd. (1996) 86 Comp Cas 734 (A.P.), Laguna Holdings Pvt. Ltd. v. Eden
Park Hotels Pvt. Ltd. [Company Petition No. 62 of 2008], Registrar of
Companies v. Navjivan Trading Finance Pvt. Ltd. (1978) 48 Comp Cas
402 (Guj), Madhusudan Gordhandas & Co. v. Madhu Wollen Industries
Pvt. Ltd. AIR 1971 SC 2600, Aventis Crosscience India Ltd. v. Nelgiris
Fertilizers Ltd. (2005) 125 Comp Cas 139 (Mad), Akolla Suryanaryana
Road v. Dwarapudi Basivireddi AIR (1932) Mad 457, Chhangamal
Harpaldas v. Dominan of India AIR (1957) Bom 276, Shantilal
Khusaldas & Bros Pvt. Ltd. v. Chandan Bala Sughir Shah (1993) 2 Bom
CR 651, Meera & Co. Ltd. v. Archies Greetings & Gifts Ltd. [decision
dated 17th July 2002 in Co. Pet. No. 320 of 2002].