https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101759 The court set aside the appointment of a receiver due to lack of leave from the company court as required by section 453 of the Companies Act. It was determined that fresh leave was not necessary for executing the decree after obtaining leave to prosecute the company under section 446. The sale of property without attachment was deemed valid due to an existing mortgage. The court emphasized executing the decree against the mortgaged property before the guarantor. The outcome resulted in the successful setting aside of the receiver appointment order and dismissal of revision petitions regarding the execution court order, with each party bearing their own costs. en-us Mon, 05 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Feb 2012 10:30:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101759 The court set aside the appointment of a receiver due to lack of leave from the company court as required by section 453 of the Companies Act. It was determined that fresh leave was not necessary for executing the decree after obtaining leave to prosecute the company under section 446. The sale of property without attachment was deemed valid due to an existing mortgage. The court emphasized executing the decree against the mortgaged property before the guarantor. The outcome resulted in the successful setting aside of the receiver appointment order and dismissal of revision petitions regarding the execution court order, with each party bearing their own costs. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 05 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101759