<?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>1988 (6) TMI 300 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101750</link>
    <description>The company court&#039;s inherent powers under rule 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, read with rule 6 and section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, extend to recalling a winding-up order where such relief is not inconsistent with the Companies Act, 1956. The statutory scheme in Part VII provides for winding-up procedure and stay of proceedings, but it does not exclude recall in appropriate circumstances. The court relied on the principle that inherent powers may be exercised to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of process. On the facts, the petitioning creditor had been satisfied and the other creditors did not object, so the winding-up order was recalled and set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 May 2018 13:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138799" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (6) TMI 300 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101750</link>
      <description>The company court&#039;s inherent powers under rule 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, read with rule 6 and section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, extend to recalling a winding-up order where such relief is not inconsistent with the Companies Act, 1956. The statutory scheme in Part VII provides for winding-up procedure and stay of proceedings, but it does not exclude recall in appropriate circumstances. The court relied on the principle that inherent powers may be exercised to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of process. On the facts, the petitioning creditor had been satisfied and the other creditors did not object, so the winding-up order was recalled and set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101750</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>