<?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>1985 (9) TMI 283 - HIGH COURT OF ORISSA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101300</link>
    <description>In winding-up proceedings, assets of the company in liquidation are generally deemed to be in the custody of the court, while section 529 preserves the position of a secured creditor enforcing its security. Where the winding-up order itself excludes assets already taken over under section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, those assets fall outside the liquidator&#039;s custody. The court held that the challenge to the corporation&#039;s exercise of sale power could not be examined in that proceeding and declined to determine the separate dispute over whether the buildings formed part of the security. The application to restrain the sale and require sale through the official liquidator was not maintainable and was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Sep 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 12:55:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138350" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (9) TMI 283 - HIGH COURT OF ORISSA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101300</link>
      <description>In winding-up proceedings, assets of the company in liquidation are generally deemed to be in the custody of the court, while section 529 preserves the position of a secured creditor enforcing its security. Where the winding-up order itself excludes assets already taken over under section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, those assets fall outside the liquidator&#039;s custody. The court held that the challenge to the corporation&#039;s exercise of sale power could not be examined in that proceeding and declined to determine the separate dispute over whether the buildings formed part of the security. The application to restrain the sale and require sale through the official liquidator was not maintainable and was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Sep 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101300</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>