https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106227 A secured creditor selling a company's assets as a deemed owner under the State Financial Corporations Act was not required to comply strictly with court-auctioneer formalities where wide newspaper publicity was given and no material prejudice was shown; the sale was therefore not invalid on that ground. A mistaken reference to section 446 instead of section 537 of the Companies Act did not defeat the company court's permission or the sale's validity. Allegations of fraud based on later notices and writ proceedings were not established. A challenge brought nearly four years after the sale was time-barred under the residuary limitation period, and the ex-director lacked locus standi after liquidation. en-us Thu, 02 Jun 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Mar 2012 13:05:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106227 A secured creditor selling a company's assets as a deemed owner under the State Financial Corporations Act was not required to comply strictly with court-auctioneer formalities where wide newspaper publicity was given and no material prejudice was shown; the sale was therefore not invalid on that ground. A mistaken reference to section 446 instead of section 537 of the Companies Act did not defeat the company court's permission or the sale's validity. Allegations of fraud based on later notices and writ proceedings were not established. A challenge brought nearly four years after the sale was time-barred under the residuary limitation period, and the ex-director lacked locus standi after liquidation. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 02 Jun 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106227