Skip to main content

Bona fide Dispute

Bona fide Dispute

What is bona-fide dispute?

If there is a bona fide and reasonable dispute as to a substantial part of the debt on which the petition is based, and the defence is a substantial one, the Court tends to refuse winding up. However, a dispute is considered to be substantial and genuine if it is bona fide and not spurious, speculative, illusory or misconceived. When the question as to genuineness of the dispute is put before the Court, the Company Court, at that stage, is not expected to hold a full trial of the matter. A bona fide dispute must be differentiated from ‘neglect to pay’. This means, even when a debtor company believes wrongly that it justified in law to refuse payment, such a refusal cannot be regarded as neglect to pay. On the contrary, where the debt is undisputed, the court will not act upon a defence that the company has the ability to pay the debt but did not choose to pay that particular debt.


Now the question which comes up is whether it is necessary to determine the exact amount of the debt disputed. In other words, can dispute as to the precise amount of the debt be considered ‘bona fide dispute’? The law in this regard is very clear and provides that where there is no doubt that the company owes the creditor a debt entitling him to a winding up order but the exact amount of the debt is disputed, the court can still make a winding up order without requiring the creditor to quantity the debt precisely. The principles on which the court acts are-


that the defence of the company is in good faith and one of substance;

the defence is likely to succeed in point of law, and

the company adduces prima facie proof of the facts on which the defence depends.

Supreme Court


Amalgamated Commercial Trades (P.) Ltd. v. Krishnaswami, (1965) 35 Com Cases 456 (para 14)

Madhusudan Gordhandas & Co. vs. Madhu Wollen Industries Pvt. Ltd.,  (1971) 3 SCC 632 (para 21 & 22)

Pradeshiya Industrial & Investment Corporation of U.P. V. North India Petro Chemical Ltd., (1994) 79 CompCas 835 (SC)  (para 31)

Vijay Industries vs. NATL Technologies Limited,  (2009) 3 SCC 527 (para 32 & 33)

IBA Health v. Info-Drive Systems, (2010) 10 SCC 553 (para 17 & 20)

High Court(s)


Sharda Bhandari vs. Aananya Electronics Ltd., 48 (1992) DLT 723 (para 9) [Delhi High Court]

Non-payment or part payment for supply of defective products is ‘bona fide’ dispute under Section 433(e)

Praneet Enviroquips Private Limited, Chandigarh vs. Vishal Papertech (India) Ltd., (1999)4CompLJ280P&H

Trade Links Corporation vs. Nalanda Tobacco Co. P. Ltd., [1999]98CompCas227(AP)

Meenakshi Paper Mills (P) Ltd. vs. Sattarsons Packaging (P) Ltd., (2000)2CompLJ233(AP)

Sales Service Company vs. AKB Paper Mill Plant Suppliers (P.) Ltd., [2005]127CompCas447(Mad)


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1)

   Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) --- PLEASE READ THE COMPLETE JOB DESCRIPTION BEFORE APPLYING ---   Urgent Hiring for: LAW STUDENTS/CS STUDENTS/ FRESHER LAW GRADUATES/ FRESHER CS. Position: Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) Department: Legal. Firm Name: LEXIS AND COMPANY – LAW FIRM. Location: Janakpuri, New Delhi. CTC: RS 5000/- Per Month. Additional Allowance: All official expenses including travelling allowance for official purposes will be paid from the day 1 of the service with the firm.   We are urgently looking for LAW STUDENTS / CS STUDENTS / FRESHER LAW GRADUATES / FRESHER CS for the position of Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) for our Law Firm in Janakpuri, New Delhi.   Eligibility: Mandatory Qualification: Any LAW STUDENTS / CS STUDENTS / FRESHER LAW GRADUATES / FRESHER CS who wants to learn as a beginner. Desired Qualification: Any additional qualification  will be pre
Post a Comment
Read more

LAW INTERNSHIP AND TRAINEE OPPORTUNITY

  LAW INTERNSHIP AND TRAINEE OPPORTUNITY: LEXIS AND COMPANY, renowned for its excellence in the legal field, is thrilled to announce an exceptional internship and trainee opportunity for aspiring final year law students and newly enrolled Advocates. This highly coveted internship  and trainee opportunity  is a paid position, providing a remarkable platform for career growth and experiential learning in a corporate environment. Eligibility: Only for final year Students and Newly Enrolled Advocates. We are offering a limited number of vacancies, designed for law students and newly enrolled advocates in the dynamic world of the legal profession. This is an immediate joining opportunity, available to candidates who are interested to work in the area of commercial and civil litigation and have interest towards drafting, and legal research. As a team member at  LEXIS AND COMPANY,  you will refine your research and drafting skills while witnessing the meticulous professional conduct expected
Post a Comment
Read more

The Doctrine of Alternative Danger

  THE DOCTRINE OF ALTERNATIVE DANGER Although the plaintiff is supposed to be cautious in spite of the defendant’s Negligence, there can also be certain situations when the plaintiff is justified in taking some threat where some unsafe state of affairs has been created by way of the defendant. The plaintiff may appear as puzzled or worried through a hazardous state of affairs created via the defendant and to store his man or woman or property, or now and again to store a third party from such danger, he may take a choice risk. The law, therefore, lets in the plaintiff to come across a choice danger to shop by himself from the chance created via the defendant. If the path adopted by him results in some harm to himself, his motion in opposition to the defendant will now not fail. The judgment of the plaintiff, however, is not rash. The position can be defined by means of the case of Jones v . Boyce . In that case, the plaintiff used to be a passenger in the defendant’s train and instruct
Post a Comment
Read more