Uralvagonzavod questions ROSBANK notes’ authenticity
11 November 2009 (11:37)
Sverdlovsk Region Arbitration Court keeps looking into the claim laid by AKB ROSBANK’s Yekaterinburg branch against Uralvagonzavod Scientific and Production Enterprise.
The plaintiff wants to receive 167.5 million RUR the enterprise owes it. The sum in question comprises the promissory notes debt as well as the interest and some fines. The defendant refuses to meet the creditor’s demands: the company claims that the date the disputed notes for December 2008-April 2009 were signed, as well as the General Director’s signatures, can’t be authentic because the GD was actually away on business trips at that moment.
Uralvagonzavod’s representative asked for some third parties to be involved in the case, namely, Uralskaya heavy-duty machinery manufacturer and M.T.E.-Finance Trade & Finance Company. This request was sustained by the court.
The plaintiff wants to receive 167.5 million RUR the enterprise owes it. The sum in question comprises the promissory notes debt as well as the interest and some fines. The defendant refuses to meet the creditor’s demands: the company claims that the date the disputed notes for December 2008-April 2009 were signed, as well as the General Director’s signatures, can’t be authentic because the GD was actually away on business trips at that moment.
Uralvagonzavod’s representative asked for some third parties to be involved in the case, namely, Uralskaya heavy-duty machinery manufacturer and M.T.E.-Finance Trade & Finance Company. This request was sustained by the court.
 | Embed to Blog |  | Subscribe to Newsletter |  |