Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :
        Companies Law

        2010 (2) TMI 595 - HC - Companies Law

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Sale Deeds Declared Void Under Companies Act 1956: Official Liquidator Upholds Section 531A The court declared the sale deeds executed in favor of certain parties as void against the official liquidator, citing violations of the Companies Act, ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
                          Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.

                            Sale Deeds Declared Void Under Companies Act 1956: Official Liquidator Upholds Section 531A

                            The court declared the sale deeds executed in favor of certain parties as void against the official liquidator, citing violations of the Companies Act, 1956. The transactions were deemed not in the ordinary course of business, falling under Section 531A. The court upheld that the sale of land was ultra vires the company's memorandum of association. The burden of proof was successfully discharged by the official liquidator, leading to the invalidation of the sale deeds.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Validity of sale deeds executed in favor of the landholders.
                            2. Bona fide nature of the transactions.
                            3. Applicability of Section 531A of the Companies Act, 1956.
                            4. Doctrine of ultra vires in relation to the company's memorandum of association.
                            5. Burden of proof on the official liquidator.

                            Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Validity of Sale Deeds Executed in Favor of the Landholders:
                            The official liquidator pointed out that certain sale deeds executed in favor of Daya Builders and Properties P. Ltd., Shashank Shekhar, and Sunita Singh should be declared null and void as they violated Sections 531A and 536 of the Companies Act, 1956. The court issued notices to the purchasers, and M/s. Daya Builders filed an interlocutory application stating that the land was purchased by the company in liquidation and subsequently sold to the Ranjan brothers, who then sold it to Daya Builders. The purchasers argued that the transactions were bona fide and conducted in the ordinary course of business.

                            2. Bona Fide Nature of the Transactions:
                            Counsel for the purchasers argued that all transactions were bona fide and the land was sold at a profit. They claimed that the Ranjan brothers had no knowledge of the winding-up proceedings and that the transactions were in the ordinary course of business. The official liquidator, however, contended that the transactions were not part of the company's usual business activities and were thus void under Section 531A.

                            3. Applicability of Section 531A of the Companies Act, 1956:
                            Section 531A states that any transfer of property made within one year before the presentation of a winding-up petition, not in the ordinary course of business, is void against the liquidator. The court found that the sale of land was not within the company's ordinary business activities as per its memorandum of association. Therefore, the transaction was void under Section 531A.

                            4. Doctrine of Ultra Vires in Relation to the Company's Memorandum of Association:
                            The official liquidator argued that the sale of land was ultra vires, as it was beyond the scope of the company's memorandum of association. The court agreed, stating that the company's main objects did not include the sale of land. The incidental or ancillary objects cannot expand the main objects to include activities not specified in the memorandum.

                            5. Burden of Proof on the Official Liquidator:
                            The court held that the official liquidator had successfully discharged the initial burden of proving that the transaction was not in the ordinary course of business. The purchasers failed to show that the company could have entered into such transactions as part of its ordinary business. The court also noted the significant increase in land value within a short period, indicating a lack of bona fides.

                            Judgment:
                            The court declared the sale deeds dated January 29, 1998, executed in favor of the Ranjan brothers, and the subsequent sale deeds dated September 16, 2002, executed in favor of Daya Builders, Sunita Singh, and Shashank Shekhar, as void against the official liquidator. The report of the official liquidator and the interlocutory applications filed by the purchasers were disposed of accordingly.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found