Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Court had jurisdiction under section 227 of the Companies Act, 1948 to validate a disposition of company property before any winding-up order had been made, and whether that jurisdiction should be exercised on the facts.
Analysis: Section 227 provides that dispositions of company property after the commencement of winding up are void unless the Court otherwise orders. The provision is directed to protecting creditors and preserving the value of the company's assets during the pendency of winding-up proceedings. The Court declined to treat the section as confined to cases where a winding-up order had already been made. It preferred the broader view that the Court may intervene when the transaction is plainly beneficial to the creditors and the surrounding facts are sufficiently clear, even though the petition is still pending. On the facts, the proposed sale of the leasehold premises would preserve value and benefit unsecured creditors, while avoiding the loss of an otherwise valuable asset.
Conclusion: The Court held that it had jurisdiction to make a validating order before the winding-up order and exercised that jurisdiction in favour of the applicant.