<?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 (8) TMI 315 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101413</link>
    <description>A creditor who merely sought winding up and advanced preliminary liquidation expenses could not be made personally liable for balance wages of workmen retained by the provisional liquidator for safeguarding the company&#039;s assets. The special acquisition statute provided an exclusive mechanism for employees&#039; arrears: claims were enforceable against the company, had to be pursued before the Commissioner of Payments, and wages enjoyed statutory priority in distribution. The direction fastening wage liability on the creditor was therefore set aside, and the workmen were left to recover in accordance with the statutory scheme against the company.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:59:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138463" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (8) TMI 315 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101413</link>
      <description>A creditor who merely sought winding up and advanced preliminary liquidation expenses could not be made personally liable for balance wages of workmen retained by the provisional liquidator for safeguarding the company&#039;s assets. The special acquisition statute provided an exclusive mechanism for employees&#039; arrears: claims were enforceable against the company, had to be pursued before the Commissioner of Payments, and wages enjoyed statutory priority in distribution. The direction fastening wage liability on the creditor was therefore set aside, and the workmen were left to recover in accordance with the statutory scheme against the company.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101413</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>