https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99440 A liquidator in winding-up proceedings subject to court supervision may be removed only for good cause shown and by a judicially reasoned order. On the facts noted, prolonged liquidation, opposition from persons connected with management, and asset-protection litigation did not establish that the liquidator alone caused delay or lack of progress, so removal was unjustified. An appellate court may interfere with a discretionary removal order where relevant material is ignored, wrong assumptions are made, or the result causes injustice; here, intervention was treated as proper judicial correction. The liquidator's continuance was upheld, with an additional liquidator appointed to protect the liquidation. en-us Wed, 29 Oct 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Jan 2012 13:15:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99440 A liquidator in winding-up proceedings subject to court supervision may be removed only for good cause shown and by a judicially reasoned order. On the facts noted, prolonged liquidation, opposition from persons connected with management, and asset-protection litigation did not establish that the liquidator alone caused delay or lack of progress, so removal was unjustified. An appellate court may interfere with a discretionary removal order where relevant material is ignored, wrong assumptions are made, or the result causes injustice; here, intervention was treated as proper judicial correction. The liquidator's continuance was upheld, with an additional liquidator appointed to protect the liquidation. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 29 Oct 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99440