<?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>1996 (3) TMI 400 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103072</link>
    <description>Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956 applies only when a winding up order has actually become operative or a provisional liquidator has been appointed; where the order remained conditional and never took effect, suit proceedings are not stayed. Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 applies only to proceedings concerning the property of the sick industrial company; leased equipment owned by the lessor does not become the company&#039;s property merely because it is in the company&#039;s possession. On these principles, both stay applications were rejected and the suit was permitted to continue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2012 16:09:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=140118" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (3) TMI 400 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103072</link>
      <description>Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956 applies only when a winding up order has actually become operative or a provisional liquidator has been appointed; where the order remained conditional and never took effect, suit proceedings are not stayed. Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 applies only to proceedings concerning the property of the sick industrial company; leased equipment owned by the lessor does not become the company&#039;s property merely because it is in the company&#039;s possession. On these principles, both stay applications were rejected and the suit was permitted to continue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103072</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>