https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97128 Substitution of a new petitioner in a winding-up petition is a discretionary remedy, not an automatic entitlement merely because the proposed substitute could otherwise present a petition and wishes to prosecute it. The court may decline substitution where the original petitioner is not proceeding diligently and the surrounding circumstances show that continuation of the winding-up proceedings would be unjust. On the stated facts, shareholder ratification of the arrangement, the bank's exercise of corporate powers, and the finding that the petition was mala fide and harmful to the interests of the company, its shareholders, and depositors justified refusal of substitution and termination of the proceeding. en-us Mon, 04 May 1931 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Jan 2012 11:35:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97128 Substitution of a new petitioner in a winding-up petition is a discretionary remedy, not an automatic entitlement merely because the proposed substitute could otherwise present a petition and wishes to prosecute it. The court may decline substitution where the original petitioner is not proceeding diligently and the surrounding circumstances show that continuation of the winding-up proceedings would be unjust. On the stated facts, shareholder ratification of the arrangement, the bank's exercise of corporate powers, and the finding that the petition was mala fide and harmful to the interests of the company, its shareholders, and depositors justified refusal of substitution and termination of the proceeding. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 04 May 1931 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97128