https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96906 Execution of winding-up payment orders was treated as execution by a Civil Court for purposes of section 25 of the Punjab Relief of Indebtedness Act, 1934, so pending proceedings could be stayed where a valid Debt Conciliation Board application had been made. The liabilities enforced against contributories were characterised as debts because the amounts had become definite and ascertainable obligations under the orders. The Court also accepted that the Board had jurisdiction and that the applications were bona fide, bringing the statutory suspension mechanism into operation. The refusal to stay the execution proceedings could not stand. en-us Tue, 16 May 1944 00:00:00 +0630 Fri, 13 Jan 2012 10:31:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96906 Execution of winding-up payment orders was treated as execution by a Civil Court for purposes of section 25 of the Punjab Relief of Indebtedness Act, 1934, so pending proceedings could be stayed where a valid Debt Conciliation Board application had been made. The liabilities enforced against contributories were characterised as debts because the amounts had become definite and ascertainable obligations under the orders. The Court also accepted that the Board had jurisdiction and that the applications were bona fide, bringing the statutory suspension mechanism into operation. The refusal to stay the execution proceedings could not stand. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 16 May 1944 00:00:00 +0630 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96906