<?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>1993 (10) TMI 268 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103181</link>
    <description>Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 bars winding-up proceedings against a sick industrial company while an inquiry under section 16 is pending or a scheme under section 17 is under preparation, consideration or implementation, unless the Board grants consent. Where the company had already been declared sick before the winding-up petition was filed, prior consent of the Board was mandatory. The provision operates as a protective statutory scheme that postpones creditor remedies rather than extinguishing them, so a petition filed without such consent was not maintainable and had to be dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Oct 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2012 12:35:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=140221" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (10) TMI 268 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103181</link>
      <description>Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 bars winding-up proceedings against a sick industrial company while an inquiry under section 16 is pending or a scheme under section 17 is under preparation, consideration or implementation, unless the Board grants consent. Where the company had already been declared sick before the winding-up petition was filed, prior consent of the Board was mandatory. The provision operates as a protective statutory scheme that postpones creditor remedies rather than extinguishing them, so a petition filed without such consent was not maintainable and had to be dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Oct 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103181</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>