https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98506 Once leave has been granted to proceed with a suit against a company in winding up, section 446(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 does not require fresh leave for interlocutory steps such as an application to amend the plaint. The amendment remains part of the already permitted suit and does not amount to a separate commencement or continuance of proceedings. In an eviction suit, additional statutory grounds of ejectment under the Bombay Rent Act do not create a new cause of action, because the cause of action is the termination of tenancy and the grounds only affect the tenant's protection against eviction. The amendment was therefore competent. en-us Sat, 16 Dec 1967 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Jan 2012 18:10:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98506 Once leave has been granted to proceed with a suit against a company in winding up, section 446(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 does not require fresh leave for interlocutory steps such as an application to amend the plaint. The amendment remains part of the already permitted suit and does not amount to a separate commencement or continuance of proceedings. In an eviction suit, additional statutory grounds of ejectment under the Bombay Rent Act do not create a new cause of action, because the cause of action is the termination of tenancy and the grounds only affect the tenant's protection against eviction. The amendment was therefore competent. Case-Laws Companies Law Sat, 16 Dec 1967 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98506