<?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>1995 (1) TMI 290 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103236</link>
    <description>A court sale in execution against a company in liquidation may be set aside where inadequate publicity, a drastic reduction in reserve price, and a sale at a price far below later offers amount to material irregularity causing substantial injury. Separate leave for execution was not required once leave to sue had already been granted, so the sale was not void on that ground under section 537 of the Companies Act. The application to set aside the sale was also treated as not barred by limitation in the special winding-up context. The court further noted the statutory protection of workmen&#039;s dues and the pari passu operation of section 529A in winding up.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2012 17:17:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=140276" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (1) TMI 290 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103236</link>
      <description>A court sale in execution against a company in liquidation may be set aside where inadequate publicity, a drastic reduction in reserve price, and a sale at a price far below later offers amount to material irregularity causing substantial injury. Separate leave for execution was not required once leave to sue had already been granted, so the sale was not void on that ground under section 537 of the Companies Act. The application to set aside the sale was also treated as not barred by limitation in the special winding-up context. The court further noted the statutory protection of workmen&#039;s dues and the pari passu operation of section 529A in winding up.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103236</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>