<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1978 (3) TMI 171 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99600</link>
    <description>A mortgage executed by the liquidator during winding up did not confer on the State Government the status of a secured creditor standing outside the winding up, so it could not claim full payment from the sale proceeds on that basis. Workmen&#039;s claims for wages, leave allowance and notice pay attracted priority under section 230 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 only to the extent those amounts fell within the statutory two-month period before the winding-up order, while gratuity and other amounts within the relevant clause were not subject to that temporal limit. The matter therefore required item-wise reconsideration of the claims under the statutory priority scheme.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Mar 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2012 10:28:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136652" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1978 (3) TMI 171 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99600</link>
      <description>A mortgage executed by the liquidator during winding up did not confer on the State Government the status of a secured creditor standing outside the winding up, so it could not claim full payment from the sale proceeds on that basis. Workmen&#039;s claims for wages, leave allowance and notice pay attracted priority under section 230 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 only to the extent those amounts fell within the statutory two-month period before the winding-up order, while gratuity and other amounts within the relevant clause were not subject to that temporal limit. The matter therefore required item-wise reconsideration of the claims under the statutory priority scheme.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Mar 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99600</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>