https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97364 Under section 153C, consent had to exist when the application was presented, and later withdrawal of consent did not defeat an application validly instituted; the maintainability objection therefore failed. The court also held that the "just and equitable" ground for winding up was not confined by ejusdem generis to earlier clauses, and that gross mismanagement, depletion of funds, disorder in affairs, and shareholder impotence could justify winding up under section 162(vi); action under section 153C was therefore competent. Once a case for winding up was made out, appointment of administrators was not invalid as interference with internal management, so the challenge failed. en-us Fri, 16 Dec 1955 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Jun 2014 12:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97364 Under section 153C, consent had to exist when the application was presented, and later withdrawal of consent did not defeat an application validly instituted; the maintainability objection therefore failed. The court also held that the "just and equitable" ground for winding up was not confined by ejusdem generis to earlier clauses, and that gross mismanagement, depletion of funds, disorder in affairs, and shareholder impotence could justify winding up under section 162(vi); action under section 153C was therefore competent. Once a case for winding up was made out, appointment of administrators was not invalid as interference with internal management, so the challenge failed. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 16 Dec 1955 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97364