The bickering stems from Xechem's claims of overstated claims by many creditors including Dr. Pandey, Dr. Misra, Colonel Pandey, but most interesting, Shekhar Basu and Margie Chassman. Xechem claims that Mr. Basu had no contract authorizing him to go to India and that his work in India provided no benefit to the company, thus Mr. Basu's claim of $265,000 should be thrown out.
My comment is that if that's the "defense" they are going to use against Shekhar, doesn't that mean we can use the same "defense" against Dr. Swift? I've never seen a contract and we know he's provided no benefit to the company!
