Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
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
  • 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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
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
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 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
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    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
      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 :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        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

        <h1>Dismissal of Judge's Summons; Emphasis on Transparency and Creditor Rights</h1> <h3>Commercial Art Engravers (P.) Ltd. Versus Indian Eastern Newspapers Society</h3> Commercial Art Engravers (P.) Ltd. Versus Indian Eastern Newspapers Society - [1978] 48 COMP. CAS. 36 (BOM.) Issues Involved:1. Nature and disclosure of the liquidator's report.2. Applicability of principles of natural justice.3. Rights of creditors in the winding-up process.4. Procedures for seeking court directions by the liquidator.5. Judicial and administrative functions of the court in winding-up matters.Detailed Analysis:1. Nature and Disclosure of the Liquidator's Report:The liquidator argued that the report made to the court is a privileged document and not typically disclosed to creditors, except in exceptional circumstances. The report contained confidential advice from attorneys and counsel, which the liquidator claimed should not be disclosed. The court held that the liquidator's report, while administrative, must still adhere to principles of natural justice. The court determined that creditors are entitled to a summary of the facts and the directions sought by the liquidator, but not the privileged legal opinions.2. Applicability of Principles of Natural Justice:The court emphasized that even administrative directions that affect the rights or legitimate expectations of individuals must conform to the principles of natural justice. The court cited several precedents, including the Supreme Court's decision in Shankarlal Aggarwala v. Shankarlal Poddar, to support the view that creditors must be heard before the court gives directions on the liquidator's report. The court concluded that the principles of natural justice apply to the present case, requiring that all contesting parties be given a hearing.3. Rights of Creditors in the Winding-Up Process:The court recognized that creditors have vested rights and legitimate expectations in the distribution of assets during the winding-up process. The court noted that the Companies Act and associated rules provide creditors with rights to challenge the liquidator's actions and to be informed about various matters arising in the winding-up. The court held that creditors have a locus to be heard in matters where the liquidator seeks directions from the court, even if the liquidator is exercising discretionary powers under section 458 of the Companies Act.4. Procedures for Seeking Court Directions by the Liquidator:The court discussed the established practice of seeking directions through the liquidator's report and the alternative procedure of a judge's summons under rule 139. The court held that while the liquidator's report is permissible under rules 6 and 10, it is not suitable for cases involving serious controversies or where the creditors' rights are substantially impaired. In such cases, the procedure of a petition or a judge's summons is more appropriate. The court concluded that the liquidator's report is suitable for routine matters or where no serious controversies are involved.5. Judicial and Administrative Functions of the Court in Winding-Up Matters:The court distinguished between the judicial and administrative functions of the court in winding-up matters. It held that directions given by the court on the liquidator's report are judicial orders and that the court must apply its judicial mind even when giving administrative directions. The court rejected the liquidator's contention that seeking directions from the court is merely a courtesy extended by a subordinate officer. The court held that the judicial process involved in granting approval to the liquidator's actions must conform to the principles of natural justice and fair play.Conclusion:The court dismissed the judge's summons but directed the liquidator to provide a summary of the facts and directions sought in the report to the creditors, and to disclose the valuation report of the movables. The court emphasized the need for transparency and adherence to natural justice principles in the winding-up process, ensuring that creditors are adequately informed and given the opportunity to be heard.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found