<?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>1957 (7) TMI 25 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97709</link>
    <description>Appointment of a provisional liquidator under the Indian Companies Act, 1913 places the company&#039;s assets and claims under the liquidator&#039;s control and suspends the directors&#039; powers for that period, so proceedings concerning company property should ordinarily be brought by the liquidator with court sanction. If the provisional liquidator is no longer in office when the suit is heard, the suit is not rendered demurrable merely because a director lacked authority when the plaint was verified. Any objection while the liquidator remains operative should be raised by seeking to strike the company off the record, not as a merits defence. The suit was held maintainable and the preliminary objection failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jul 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 17:23:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134766" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1957 (7) TMI 25 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97709</link>
      <description>Appointment of a provisional liquidator under the Indian Companies Act, 1913 places the company&#039;s assets and claims under the liquidator&#039;s control and suspends the directors&#039; powers for that period, so proceedings concerning company property should ordinarily be brought by the liquidator with court sanction. If the provisional liquidator is no longer in office when the suit is heard, the suit is not rendered demurrable merely because a director lacked authority when the plaint was verified. Any objection while the liquidator remains operative should be raised by seeking to strike the company off the record, not as a merits defence. The suit was held maintainable and the preliminary objection failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jul 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97709</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>