https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104483 The court concluded that it would not be appropriate to appoint a receiver over the properties of a company in liquidation when the official liquidator is already in place, as it may lead to unnecessary competition and duplication of roles. The court emphasized the official liquidator's statutory responsibilities and the need to avoid conflict between the receiver and the official liquidator. The application for the appointment of a receiver by secured creditors was rejected, with the court highlighting that the official liquidator is better positioned to manage the assets of the company in liquidation while safeguarding the interests of all creditors. en-us Fri, 24 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Feb 2012 12:42:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104483 The court concluded that it would not be appropriate to appoint a receiver over the properties of a company in liquidation when the official liquidator is already in place, as it may lead to unnecessary competition and duplication of roles. The court emphasized the official liquidator's statutory responsibilities and the need to avoid conflict between the receiver and the official liquidator. The application for the appointment of a receiver by secured creditors was rejected, with the court highlighting that the official liquidator is better positioned to manage the assets of the company in liquidation while safeguarding the interests of all creditors. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 24 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104483