https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100181 Interim stay of an order authorising takeover of an industrial undertaking was refused because the balance of convenience and comparative hardship favoured allowing the management transfer to proceed. The court noted that suspension would prolong unemployment of workmen, delay revival of a unit producing an essential commodity, and reduce the undertaking's value, while refusal would not cause substantial prejudice to the appellant. The order was linked to the statutory basis of the Central Government's satisfaction that the unit could be restarted and that restart would serve public need for scheduled articles. The stay application was therefore rejected. en-us Wed, 10 Feb 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Jan 2012 15:11:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100181 Interim stay of an order authorising takeover of an industrial undertaking was refused because the balance of convenience and comparative hardship favoured allowing the management transfer to proceed. The court noted that suspension would prolong unemployment of workmen, delay revival of a unit producing an essential commodity, and reduce the undertaking's value, while refusal would not cause substantial prejudice to the appellant. The order was linked to the statutory basis of the Central Government's satisfaction that the unit could be restarted and that restart would serve public need for scheduled articles. The stay application was therefore rejected. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 10 Feb 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100181