https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103192 A challenge to a sanctioned company scheme seeking exclusion of decree-holders from the depositor class and liberty to execute a decree was found not maintainable. The Calcutta High Court noted that the application was made nearly three years after sanction, making the relief discretionary and unjustified. It further stated that, under section 153 of the Companies Act, the court could sanction or refuse a scheme but could not alter it after sanction without fresh consideration and agreement of the affected company, creditors or members. The proper remedy was an appeal against the sanction order, while the executionability of the decree had to be decided in execution proceedings. en-us Tue, 26 May 1936 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Feb 2012 13:29:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103192 A challenge to a sanctioned company scheme seeking exclusion of decree-holders from the depositor class and liberty to execute a decree was found not maintainable. The Calcutta High Court noted that the application was made nearly three years after sanction, making the relief discretionary and unjustified. It further stated that, under section 153 of the Companies Act, the court could sanction or refuse a scheme but could not alter it after sanction without fresh consideration and agreement of the affected company, creditors or members. The proper remedy was an appeal against the sanction order, while the executionability of the decree had to be decided in execution proceedings. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 26 May 1936 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103192