<?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>1948 (2) TMI 12 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96991</link>
    <description>Section 202 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 was treated as providing only a statutory appellate or rehearing route, available subject to the conditions governing appeals from orders in ordinary original jurisdiction. Persons who had not appeared, filed the required affidavits, or otherwise become parties to the winding-up petition could not invoke review, rescission, or setting aside of an ex parte winding-up order through inherent powers or by analogy with ex parte decrees. A stay under section 173 was also confined to cases where continuation of liquidation was unnecessary or undesirable; payment of the petitioning creditor alone was insufficient where other liabilities, management disputes, and the need to investigate the company&#039;s affairs remained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 1948 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 15:38:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134049" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1948 (2) TMI 12 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96991</link>
      <description>Section 202 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 was treated as providing only a statutory appellate or rehearing route, available subject to the conditions governing appeals from orders in ordinary original jurisdiction. Persons who had not appeared, filed the required affidavits, or otherwise become parties to the winding-up petition could not invoke review, rescission, or setting aside of an ex parte winding-up order through inherent powers or by analogy with ex parte decrees. A stay under section 173 was also confined to cases where continuation of liquidation was unnecessary or undesirable; payment of the petitioning creditor alone was insufficient where other liabilities, management disputes, and the need to investigate the company&#039;s affairs remained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 1948 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96991</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>