<?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>2003 (1) TMI 524 - HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108369</link>
    <description>A company petition for winding up on inability to pay debt was declined where the respondent had already been declared a sick industrial company and the matter had been referred for winding up under the special statutory regime. Once the Board found the company non-viable, with net worth fully eroded and no prospect of revival, the creditor&#039;s claim had to be pursued in the winding up proceedings before the Official Liquidator alongside other creditors. The Court held that continuing the separate petition served no purpose and would not prejudice the petitioner, whose claim remained protected in those proceedings, so the petition was disposed of.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Mar 2012 12:40:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=145386" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (1) TMI 524 - HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108369</link>
      <description>A company petition for winding up on inability to pay debt was declined where the respondent had already been declared a sick industrial company and the matter had been referred for winding up under the special statutory regime. Once the Board found the company non-viable, with net worth fully eroded and no prospect of revival, the creditor&#039;s claim had to be pursued in the winding up proceedings before the Official Liquidator alongside other creditors. The Court held that continuing the separate petition served no purpose and would not prejudice the petitioner, whose claim remained protected in those proceedings, so the petition was disposed of.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108369</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>