TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeal dismissed on Company Court's authority to appoint provisional liquidator for asset sale under Companies Act</h1> <h3>Marigold Leasing (India) Ltd. Versus Shashi Bhushan</h3> Marigold Leasing (India) Ltd. Versus Shashi Bhushan - [2009] 90 SCL 229 (PUNJ. & HAR.) Issues:1. Scope of Enquiry in Appeal2. Material on which plea for winding up was made3. Subsequent important events4. Statutory powers of Provisional Liquidator5. Extent of Directions that the Company Court could pass6. DispositionScope of Enquiry in Appeal:The primary issue in this case was whether the Company Court had the authority to appoint a provisional liquidator with the power to sell properties not only belonging to the Company but also those in the names of other companies, based on the premise that such assets were created using funds collected by the Company.Material on which plea for winding up was made:The application for winding up the company was based on allegations of fraud by the directors, involving diversion of company funds for personal use and purchasing properties in the names of other companies to conceal assets from creditors. The Company Court appointed a provisional liquidator after finding evidence that funds were transferred to companies owned by one of the directors, indicating the need for a thorough investigation to determine the extent of assets owned by the Company.Subsequent important events:After the appointment of the provisional liquidator, properties belonging to the Company were identified and handed over for sale. The Official Liquidator gathered details related to the Company, and the proceedings were advanced for the sale of several properties. The appellant contested the ownership of these properties, but the Court held that the properties were rightfully handed over to the liquidator.Statutory powers of Provisional Liquidator:The provisional liquidator appointed by the Court under section 450(3) of the Companies Act possesses the same powers as a regular liquidator. These powers include the authority to sell company properties, as outlined in section 457 of the Companies Act.Extent of Directions that the Company Court could pass:The Company Court, in addition to the powers of the liquidator, has the authority under section 477 to summon individuals and secure company assets. The Court's wide powers allow it to pass orders to protect the interests of parties seeking winding up. The Court's directions regarding the investigation and sale of assets were deemed lawful, considering the provisions of the Companies Act safeguarding third-party interests.Disposition:The appeal challenging the Company Court's directions was dismissed as unsubstantiated, with no order as to costs.This judgment clarifies the powers of the Company Court and the provisional liquidator in cases of winding up, emphasizing the need for thorough investigations and protection of all stakeholders' interests under the Companies Act.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
