- (1.) THE company resists the creditor's petitionfor having it wound up on the twin grounds of lack of bona fides on the petitioner's part and the claim being barred by the laws of limitation.
(2.) THE company accepts having received the payment from the petitioner though the parties are at variance as to the purpose of payment, a matter more of form than of substance. The petitioner claims that it gave a loan of rs. 9,99,887. 96 to the company in six tranches beginning March, 1994 and April, 1996, the entire sum being repayable on demand with interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum. Though the petitioner is unable to produce any document evidencing such agreement, it cites the company having unfailingly acknowledged the liability to the petitioner in its successive balance sheets and relies on the last of such balance sheets for the year ended March 31, 2002 which was signed on the company's behalf on July 6, 2002. The petitioner is unable to establish the exact nature of the transaction, however, as the company acknowledges receipt of such sum on account of advance against property.
(3.) IN December, 2003 the petitioner demanded refund of the money it had allegedly made available to the company by way of loan. The company respondent to the demand contained in the statutory notice by its writing of february 5, 2004. It is the nature of the company's defence found in its response to the statutory notice that if the key issue in these proceedings as it is the defence found in such response which has been repeated and amplified in the company's affidavit: "we object to your letter dated December 5, 2003 received by us on January 24, 2004. You have no authority to represent the company or issue any notice. As you are aware M/s. Carboxy Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. belongs to Sri Vinod kumar Jain, one of our Directors. You have fraudulently purported to show his removal as a Director together with his wife. You have also purported to illegally change the shareholding. Such wrongful acts are the subject-matter of challenge in C. S. No. 249 of 2003 (Vinod Kumar Jain and Anr. vs. Pawan kumar Jain and Ors.) pending before the Hon'ble High Court, Calcutta. Accordingly the letter is illegal, without authority, null and void. It is important in this context that Mr. Viond Kuamr Jain and his family members and supporters enjoy majority shareholding in Carboxy Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Without prejudice to the above, we deny that loan was given by Carboxy chemicals Pvt. Ltd. as alleged. The sum of Rs. 9,99,887. 96 was advanced by you for the purpose of purchasing property as you are fully aware. Due to various breaches on your part, the said sum was forfeited of which also you are fully aware. Accordingly no amount is due or payable by us to you. ";