<?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>1951 (9) TMI 26 - HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97138</link>
    <description>The appeal from the Chief Justice&#039;s order regarding the compulsory winding up of a company and sale of its mill premises was dismissed. The court upheld the decision to accept a higher bid of Rs. 1,15,000 over the initial bid of Rs. 1,10,000, despite the appellant&#039;s argument for confirmation based on lack of inadequacy in their offer. The court emphasized the Chief Justice&#039;s discretion in accepting the higher offer, considering the Official Liquidator&#039;s recommendation and the absence of automatic acceptance rights for the initial bidder. It was suggested to set a reserve price for clarity in future sales.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 1951 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 Jan 2012 11:50:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134196" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1951 (9) TMI 26 - HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97138</link>
      <description>The appeal from the Chief Justice&#039;s order regarding the compulsory winding up of a company and sale of its mill premises was dismissed. The court upheld the decision to accept a higher bid of Rs. 1,15,000 over the initial bid of Rs. 1,10,000, despite the appellant&#039;s argument for confirmation based on lack of inadequacy in their offer. The court emphasized the Chief Justice&#039;s discretion in accepting the higher offer, considering the Official Liquidator&#039;s recommendation and the absence of automatic acceptance rights for the initial bidder. It was suggested to set a reserve price for clarity in future sales.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 1951 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97138</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>