9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (5) TMI 275X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which was not paid after service of statutory notice. The petitioner filed C. P. No. 166 of 1983, for winding up the respondent-company for non-payment of the debt due. The petition was disposed of by the learned company judge with the following observations : "The parties have entered into a compromise. In view of the same, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that this petition may be dismissed as withdrawn. I order accordingly. It is further prayed that the whole of the amount compromised has not been paid so far, so the petitioner may be allowed permission to file a fresh petition if the amount is not paid according to the compromise. The prayer is allowed and the petition is dismissed with permission to file a fresh petition in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct. The principles on which the court acts are : (1) that the defence of the company is in good faith and one of substance ; (2) the defence is likely to succeed in point of law, and (3) the company produces prime facie proof of the facts on which the defence depends. The petitioner has led prima facie proof that the amount claimed in the petition is due from the respondent. The statement of accounts appended as annexure P-3 to the petition vouchsafed the assertion made in the petition. The correctness of the statement of accounts, which is part and parcel of the petition, is not doubted in the written statement filed by the respon dent. The petitioner served statutory notice. The respondent sent a reply to it. The demand made through the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t one of substance. The assertions made in the written statement cannot attain the character of fact proved. I am satisfied that the company has failed to discharge the obligation that the debt is bona fide disputed and that the defence is a substantial one. The petitioner has prima facie established that the debt is due from the respondent-company and it is not bona fide disputed by the respondent-company. The petitioner has claimed interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum on the principal amount from the date the debt became due with effect from April 1, 1986. The petitioner has not led any proof in support of the plea that it is entitled to interest at the rate demanded. A seller is entitled to interest on the price of goods suppl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
