https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97654 In liquidation, a creditor's claim that was still subsisting on the date of the winding-up order is not defeated merely because it was presented later or became time-barred thereafter. The liquidator is treated as holding the company's assets in trust for distribution among existing liabilities, so limitation does not run in the same way against a claim proved after the winding-up order. A debt already barred when liquidation begins cannot be admitted, but an alive debt may be proved later, subject to protection of dividends already paid or commitments already made. On that footing, the claim was admitted as an ordinary debt to the extent proved, with the creditors' list modified accordingly. en-us Mon, 11 May 1959 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Jan 2012 15:56:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97654 In liquidation, a creditor's claim that was still subsisting on the date of the winding-up order is not defeated merely because it was presented later or became time-barred thereafter. The liquidator is treated as holding the company's assets in trust for distribution among existing liabilities, so limitation does not run in the same way against a claim proved after the winding-up order. A debt already barred when liquidation begins cannot be admitted, but an alive debt may be proved later, subject to protection of dividends already paid or commitments already made. On that footing, the claim was admitted as an ordinary debt to the extent proved, with the creditors' list modified accordingly. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 11 May 1959 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97654