https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99076 In a company petition under sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956, the Delhi High Court treated the proceeding as analogous to a winding-up petition and held that substitution is permissible when the original petitioner dies or ceases to prosecute. It recognised that the right to pursue the surviving claim passes to the deceased petitioner's estate under section 306 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, and that the widow and children were competent to represent that estate as legal representatives. The Court further held that sections 212, 213, 214 and 370 of the Indian Succession Act did not require a succession certificate before impleadment, and that prior consigning of the matter to the record room did not amount to final disposal. en-us Wed, 06 Mar 1974 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Jan 2012 11:05:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99076 In a company petition under sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956, the Delhi High Court treated the proceeding as analogous to a winding-up petition and held that substitution is permissible when the original petitioner dies or ceases to prosecute. It recognised that the right to pursue the surviving claim passes to the deceased petitioner's estate under section 306 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, and that the widow and children were competent to represent that estate as legal representatives. The Court further held that sections 212, 213, 214 and 370 of the Indian Succession Act did not require a succession certificate before impleadment, and that prior consigning of the matter to the record room did not amount to final disposal. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 06 Mar 1974 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99076