https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98787 Execution proceedings against a company in winding up were not treated as a nullity merely because prior leave of the winding-up court had not been obtained. Section 171 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 was applied as a control mechanism to protect the winding-up court's supervision and equitable distribution among creditors, so the proceeding remained ineffective until leave was granted and could then take effect from that date. The existence of conflicting High Court views did not justify certification where the proposed appeal was found untenable on the merits, and the requirements under Article 133(1)(b) and (c) were not satisfied. en-us Fri, 25 Sep 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Aug 2014 12:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98787 Execution proceedings against a company in winding up were not treated as a nullity merely because prior leave of the winding-up court had not been obtained. Section 171 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 was applied as a control mechanism to protect the winding-up court's supervision and equitable distribution among creditors, so the proceeding remained ineffective until leave was granted and could then take effect from that date. The existence of conflicting High Court views did not justify certification where the proposed appeal was found untenable on the merits, and the requirements under Article 133(1)(b) and (c) were not satisfied. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 25 Sep 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98787