https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105730 An undertaking given to a court may, in appropriate cases, have the force of an order, and deliberate breach of a clear undertaking can found contempt. Here, the statement was not a categorical promise to pay by a fixed date; it only indicated that time was needed to work out a payment schedule. Contempt jurisdiction was therefore not attracted because the undertaking and any breach were not clear, and the circumstances did not show a deliberate or intentional violation. The respondent also gained no advantage from the statement, as the winding up proceedings could not have advanced further once the company's sickness was before the Board under the special statutory regime. en-us Thu, 09 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 12:50:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105730 An undertaking given to a court may, in appropriate cases, have the force of an order, and deliberate breach of a clear undertaking can found contempt. Here, the statement was not a categorical promise to pay by a fixed date; it only indicated that time was needed to work out a payment schedule. Contempt jurisdiction was therefore not attracted because the undertaking and any breach were not clear, and the circumstances did not show a deliberate or intentional violation. The respondent also gained no advantage from the statement, as the winding up proceedings could not have advanced further once the company's sickness was before the Board under the special statutory regime. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 09 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105730