India: Inability To Pay Debts as a Ground for Winding Up the Company

Last Updated: 1 July 2002

Duvva Pavan Kumar* & M. Chandana**


Winding up is a process by which the affairs of the company come to an end. It has been described as "...a process whereby its life is ended and its property administered for the benefit of its creditors and members. An administrator, called liquidator, is appointed and he takes control of the company, collects its assets, pays its dues and finally distributes any surplus among the members in accordance with their rights"1.

As understood, the purpose of winding up is to realise the companies assets and pay its dues. However, the courts have through various judicial pronouncements clarified this misnomer. The Bombay High Court in Ambey Flour Mills (P) Ltd. v. Vimal Chand Jain2, held that the machinery for winding up will not be allowed to be utilised merely as a means for realizing due from a company.

The jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 433 is not that of a court which is essentially meant for settling money disputes between parties, but is to subserve the object of winding up of companies which have not paid their debts or which are unable to pay their debts3. Thus, the object of Section 433 is to provide a summary remedy and save the shareholders or creditors of a company, where a company is unable to meet its admitted liabilities4.

Proceedings under Section 433 are not a substitute for a civil suit by a creditor against the company. The mere filing of a civil suit need not be an impediment to proceed with the company petition for winding up5.

Inability to Pay Debts

Section 433(e) of the Companies Act, 1956 provides that in cases where the company is unable to pay its debts the court can order winding up. The expression ‘unable to pay its debts’ has to be taken in the commercial sense of being unable to meet current demands though the company may be otherwise solvent6. The fact that the liabilities exceed the assets does not necessarily mean that the company is unable to pay its debts. It may still be in a position to meet the demands of the creditor when made7. However, where the court is satisfied upon a general perusal of the balance sheet that the company cannot pay its debts i.e., its assets are not sufficient to satisfy its liabilities, the court may order the winding up of the company8.

The inability to pay debts primarily arise under three circumstances9:

  1. Where the company fails to clear the debt of the creditor (a sum exceeding five hundred rupees) within three weeks immediately preceding the date of demand for payment being made10;
  2. Where execution or other process issued on a decree or order of any court in favour of the company is returned unsatisfied in whole or part11 and
  3. Where it is proved to the satisfaction of the court that the company is unable to pay its debts12.

A petition for winding up on the ground of inability to pay debts must contain all the relevant information about the debt13. The petition must disclose the assets of the company and whether they are sufficient to meet the liabilities including contingent and prospective liabilities. Further, the petition must also disclose the position of fixed assets as well as valuation of plant and machinery of the company14.

Where a debt is bona fide disputed by the company and the court is satisfied with the company's defence a winding up order will not be made15. In K. Appa rao v. Sarkar Chemicals (P) Ltd16., the Andhra Pradesh High Court held that where a company has a prima facie sustainable defence or a bona fide dispute of its obligations to discharge the alleged debts or liabilities, the court may not entertain proceedings for the winding up, much less order winding up.

Once there is an admission on part of the respondent company of liability of dues payable, then a petition under Section 433 cannot be dismissed on technical grounds17. Company courts can exercise their discretionary powers of dismissing the petition even before issuing a show cause notice regarding admission18

Inspite of repeated demands if a company neglects to pay its debts, it will be considered as the inability of the company to pay its debts and an order of winding up can be passed by the court19. By non-payment of the undisputed debt within the period of statutory demand, the company is deemed unable to pay its debts and where the company is unable to pay its debts, winding up ought generally to follow in public interest20.

To raise the presumption of companies inability to pay its debts it is not enough merely to show that the company has omitted to pay the debt despite service of statutory notice, it must be further shown that the company omitted to pay without reasonable excuse and conditions of insolvency in the commercial sense exist21. Merely because notice under section 434 was not served, it cannot be said that company was not unable to pay its debts22.

Section 433 cannot be used to coerce a company to make payments even though its liability is admitted23. In I.T.C. Ltd. v. Fomento Resorts & Hotels Ltd24., it was held that a winding up petition is not to be filed as a coercive means of recovery of debt. Similarly, in Agro Anlagewbau GmbH v. Orient Ceramics & Industries Ltd25., the Delhi High Court observed that the winding up jurisdiction is not to be use as an arm twisting device to compel a company to pay up a claim which it is unwilling to pay for legitimate reasons.

The inability of a company to pay its debts has to be proved by the claimant creditor26. A creditor who on demand fails to get amounts due paid to him becomes entitled to obtain an order of winding ex-debito justitiate.

The Gujarat High Court in Tata Iron and Steel Co. v. Micro Forge (India) Ltd27., prepared a chronicle on the points that emerged from the case law under Section 433:

  1. The remedy under section 433 in general and under clause (e) in particular is not a matter of right, as such, and it is the discretion of the company court. It does not confer any right on any person to seek order that the company should be wound up. It is a provision empowering the court by a statutory provision to pass order of winding up in an appropriate case.
  2. Merely because any one of the circumstances enumerated in section 433 of the Companies Act, exists, the court is not bound to order winding up of the company. Nobody can aspire to wind up the company as a matter of course. The court has wide power and discretion. In this connection, inability to pay debts, is required to be judged from various set of facts and circumstances. It may also be stated that inability to pay debts in all cases, ipso facto, could not be construed as an appropriate case for winding up.
  3. The debt is a money which is payable or will be payable in future by reason of person’s obligation. The expression ‘debt’ would refer the liability to pay and it rests on certain contingencies, conditions and casualties. Even if the debt is proved and even if the inability to pay the debt is also shown, it is not a launching pad, in all cases, for successful winding up order. Inability may arise for variety of reasons and the court is obliged to consider whether inability is the outcome of any deliberate or designed action or more temporary shock and effect of economy and market. In a given case, it may happen that a party may become unable to pay its debts for a while, but that by itself is not criterion for exercising the power to wind up, ipso facto.
  4. It is necessary for the company court to consider the financial status, strength and substratum of the company, in overall context. It is possible, at times, there may be a cash crunch. It may be also, possible, at times the temporary cash crisis despite high sale and heavy turnover and, therefore, in such a situation, mere disability or only on the ground of inability to pay would not constitute a ground empowering the court to wind up the company.
  5. If the company is an ongoing concern having regular business and employment of employees, the court cannot remain oblivious of to this aspect. The effect of winding up would be of putting an end to the business or an industry or an entrepreneurship and, in turn, resulting into loss of employment to the several employees and loss of production and effect on the larger interest of the society.
  6. Even dividend declared by the company regularly and having profit in the light of the profit and loss account, though temporary, there may be inability to pay the debt or in case of any eventuality, the company is unable to make the payment of dues and that by itself could not be construed as a ground to winding it up.
  7. Winding up of a company, as such, is nothing but a commercial death or insolvency and, therefore, the company court is obliged to take into consideration not only the temporary inability, or disability to make the payment of debts, but the entire status and position of the company in the market.
  8. When grounds on which the winding up order can be denied, upon an evaluation of the facts of the case, after admission, exists from the record already placed before the court, it would be a sound exercise of discretion to reject the petition instead of admitting it. This view is very much celebrated.
  9. Inability to pay debts in terms of section 433 (e) read with section 434(1) (a), demand of the debt would raise a presumption as to inability to pay its debts. But such a presumption is rebuttable. Such a presumption maybe rebutted on existing material and what evidence is sufficient depends on the facts and circumstance of the case.
  10. If the company has shown considerable growth in a reasonable span and is a growth oriented enterprise, even temporary inability would not be sufficient to drive it to wind up.
  11. Though, ordinarily, an unpaid creditor may aspire for an order of winding up, then ‘ex debito justitiae’ rule is not of inflexible mandate, but is, as such a matter of discretion of the court.
  12. Section 433 is also indicative of the fact that even if one or more grounds mentioned in section 433 exists, it is not obligatory for the court to make an order of winding up. The court has discretionary power. The court must in each case exercise its discretion in deciding whether in the circumstance of the case, it would be in the interest of justice to wind up the company. It is well-known rule of prudence that even in case where indebtedness to the petitioning person is undisputed, the court does not pass order for winding up where it is satisfied that of it would not be in the larger interest of justice to wind up the company.
  13. It is, also, well settled that a winding up order shall not be made on a creditors petition, if it would not benefit him or the companies creditors in general.
  14. The court is also obliged to consider that it would be in the interest of justice to give the company sometime to come out of the momentary financial crisis or any other temporary difficulty as winding up is a measure of last resort.
  15. Winding up course cannot be adopted as a recourse to recovery of the debt.
  16. The court must bear in mind one more celebrated principles and consider whether the company has reached a stage where it is obviously and plainly and commercially insolvent, that is to say, that its assets are such and its existing liabilities are such as to make the court feel clearly satisfied that current assets would be insufficient to meet the current liabilities, along with other principles.
  17. It is also necessary to consider whether the respondent company has become defunct or has closed its business for quite sometime, whether it is commercially insolvent. For the purpose of finding commercially insolvency, a mere look into the financial data is relevant to examine about its soundness. In all matters relating to winding up the court may have regarded to the wishes of the creditors and contributories and may, if necessary, ascertain their wishes appropriately. If the company is solvent, the wishes of the contributories would carry more weight as they are persons, mainly, interested in the assets.
  18. The element of public policy in regard to commercial morality has, likewise, to be taken into account before determining the winding up issue. The court has also to consider the purpose and policy behind section 443 and 557 of the Companies Act.
  19. Winding up is the last thing the court would do and not the first thing to do having regard to its impact and consequences. The winding up of a company would ensure: (a) closing down a company which is engaged in production or manufacture or which provides some services; (b) it would throw out of employment numerous persons and result in gross hardship to the members of families of the employees; (c) loss of revenue to the State by way of collection of taxes which otherwise should have been collected, on account of customs, excise duties, sales tax, income tax etc. (d) scarcity of goods and diminishing of employment opportunities.
  20. Winding up petition has to be submitted in prescribed form highlighting all the facts and emphasising the inability of the company to pay its debts. The form prescribed under the Company Court Rules clearly, indicate that the petitioner should provide all necessary material particulars. The petitioner is obliged to show that the financial status or the monetary substratum or the commercial viability of the company has gone so low and down that winding up is obviously, and evidently, unavoidable.
  21. It is a settled proposition of law that winding up petition is not legitimate means of seeking to enforce the payment of debt which is disputed by the company, bona fide. Winding up petition ought not to be aimed at pressurizing the company to pay the money. Such an attempt would be nothing but would tantamount to blackmailing or stigmatising the concerned company by abusing the process of the court.
  22. Winding up petition is not an appropriate mode enforcing bona fide disputed debts as it is nothing but misuse and abuse of the process of the court.
  23. Winding up petition is not an alternative form for resolving the debt dispute. In certain cases disputes are such that they are fit for resolving through civil court rather than through company court.
  24. What is bona fide and what is not is a question of fact. The expression bona fide would mean genuine, in good faith and when the dispute is based on substantial grounds or when defence is probable and with some substance, it is a bona fide dispute. It must be strictly noted that winding up petition is not an alternate to civil suit.


A winding up petition is, therefore, not a legitimate means of seeking to enforce payment of the debt which is bona fide disputed by the company. A petition presented ostensibly for winding up but really to exercise pressure will be dismissed and maybe stigmatised as a scandalous abuse of the process of court. Further, a winding up petition cannot be sustained on the basis of a debt, which was due prior to the incorporation of the company even if one of the objects of the company was to pay off the debt28.

The court is competent, in consideration of circumstances to refuse to pass an order of winding up even if the company is unable to pay its debts. It is equally in its discretion to make a conditional order however, such a discretion has to be exercised judicially29. in Navjivan Trading Finance (P) Ltd., In Re30, the court observed that winding up is the last thing that the court would do and not the first thing the court would do having regard to its impact and consequences, for winding up of a company would result, in (a) closing down of a unit which produces some goods or provides some service; (b) throwing out of employment numerous persons results in grave hardship to the members of the families of such employees; (c) loss of revenue to the state by way of collection that the state could hope to make on account of customs or excise duties, sales tax, income tax etc.; and (d) scarcity of goods and in diminishing of employment opportunities. The court would not be too keen or too anxious to wind up a company by an order of the court only on the ground that the company is unable to pay the debts. In fact, it would be a blow to do so, so long as there is any possibility of resurrecting the company.

Similarly, in New Swadeshi Mills of Ahmedabad Ltd., v. Dye-Chem Corporation31, the court held that the policy of the court should be to revive the company thought at the moment the company may not be solvent and may not be able to meet its obligations towards its creditors.

* IV Year, B.A.,B.L (Hons) NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad.

** IV Year, B.A.,B.L (Hons) NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad.

1 Professor L.C.B. Grover, The Principles of Modern Company Law, 3rd ed, 1969, p. 647.

2 (1991) 70 Comp. Cas. 459 (Bom).

3 B. Viswanathan v. Seshasayee Paper & Boards Ltd., [1992] 73 Comp. Cas. 136 (Mad).

4 Smt. Vijayalakshmi v. Hari Hara Ginning and Pressing (P) Ltd (1999) 96 Comp. Cas. 723 (A.P).

5 Ibid.

6 Concord Finance P. Ltd. v. Rawalpindi TheatersP. Ltd., (1969) 2 Comp L.J. 244.

7 A.C.K. krishnaswami v. Stressed Concrete Constructions (P) Ltd., (1964) 34 Comp. Cas. 6 (Mad).

8 Bombay Cotton Manufacturing Co., Re, (1909) 11 Bom LR 1302 (Bom).

9 Ibid. Section 434.

10 Ibid. Section 434(a). Debts here is any sum exceeding Rs 500/-.

11 Ibid. Section 434(b).

12 Ibid. Section 434(c).

13 Focus Advertising (P) Ltd., v. Ahoora Blocks (P) Ltd., [1975] 45 Comp. Cas. 534 (Bom).

14 Kanchanganga Chemical Indistries v. Mysore Chipboards Ltd., [1998] 91 Comp. Cas. 646 (Kar).

15 Piara Singh (S.) v. S.H.R. Properties Pvt. Ltd., (1993) 10 Corpt. LA 83 (Del).

16 (1995) 84 Comp. Cas. 670 (A.P).

17 G.K.W. Ltd., v. Shriram Bearings Ltd., [1998] 18 SCL 461 (Delhi).

18 Kanchangaga Chemical Industries v. Mysore Chipboard Ltd., [1998] 18 SCL 461 (Delhi).

19 Advent Corporation In Re, 39 CompCas. 463.

20 Dena Bank v. Khatau Dyes and Fibres Ltd., [1997] 5 Comp. LJ 544 (Bom).

21 Kanchanganga Chemical Industries v. Mysore Chipboard Ltd., [1998] 91 Comp. Cas. 646 (Kar).

22 Garodia Hardware Stores v. Nimodia Plantations & Industries (P) Ltd., [1998] 4 Copm. LJ 292 (Gauhati).

23 P.K. Varghese v. J.T.V. Metal Finishers (P) Ltd., [1988] 63 Comp. Cas. 644 (Kar).

24 [1991] 70 Comp. Cas. 459 (Bom).

25 [1986] 60 Comp. Cas. 691 (Del).

26 Trilok chand Jain v. Swastika Stripes Pvt. Ltd., (1992) 75 Comp. Cas. 275 (P&H).

27 2000 CLC 1669 at 1674 to 1677 (Guj-DB).

28 Janbazar Manna Estate Ltd., Re, (1931) 1 Comp. Cas. 243.

29 Dena Bank v. Khatau Dyes and Fibres Ltd., [1997] 5 Comp. LJ 544 (Bom).

30 [1978] 4 Comp. Cas. 402 (Guj).

31 [1986] 59 Comp. Cas. 183 (Guj).

The content of this article does not in any way constitute legal advice by the author and should not be relied on in that way. Specific professional advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions