<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1939 (10) TMI 5 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96800</link>
    <description>A court cannot revoke a sanction for sale of company property or compromise of suits after the Official Liquidator has acted on it and the transactions have been completed. The earlier sanction had been implemented through the sale and settlement of pending suits, so the court lacked jurisdiction to undo completed acts in the absence of clear statutory authority; the matter was not a review under Order 47 CPC. The suggested grounds of want of notice, absence of subordinate court approval, and suppression of material facts did not justify cancellation, as the sanction was general, interested persons were aware of it, and the compromise was beneficial to the estate and creditors.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Oct 1939 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2012 12:12:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=133858" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1939 (10) TMI 5 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96800</link>
      <description>A court cannot revoke a sanction for sale of company property or compromise of suits after the Official Liquidator has acted on it and the transactions have been completed. The earlier sanction had been implemented through the sale and settlement of pending suits, so the court lacked jurisdiction to undo completed acts in the absence of clear statutory authority; the matter was not a review under Order 47 CPC. The suggested grounds of want of notice, absence of subordinate court approval, and suppression of material facts did not justify cancellation, as the sanction was general, interested persons were aware of it, and the compromise was beneficial to the estate and creditors.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Oct 1939 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96800</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>