https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99446 The High Court of Delhi, in a case concerning jurisdiction under section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956, dismissed a petition challenging a resolution of liquidation passed by a company. Justice Kapur ruled that the court lacked jurisdiction under section 446(2) due to the absence of a valid winding-up process. The court granted the petitioner liberty to seek alternative legal remedies under the Companies Act, 1956, or other laws. The dismissal did not incur costs or extend the limitation period for pursuing other legal actions. en-us Wed, 21 Jan 1976 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Jan 2012 13:21:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99446 The High Court of Delhi, in a case concerning jurisdiction under section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956, dismissed a petition challenging a resolution of liquidation passed by a company. Justice Kapur ruled that the court lacked jurisdiction under section 446(2) due to the absence of a valid winding-up process. The court granted the petitioner liberty to seek alternative legal remedies under the Companies Act, 1956, or other laws. The dismissal did not incur costs or extend the limitation period for pursuing other legal actions. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 21 Jan 1976 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99446