https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108938 Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956 enlarges the company court's jurisdiction to questions arising in winding up, but only to the extent needed for effective liquidation and summary disposal of incidental matters. A guarantor's independent liability to indemnify a creditor does not, by itself, arise in the course of winding up, and it is not necessary for the company court to determine that liability for the company's winding up. The guarantor may pursue available defences in the proper forum, including quia-timet relief where appropriate, but that does not convert the dispute into an incidental winding up question. The company court therefore should not assume jurisdiction over the guarantor's liability dispute. en-us Tue, 19 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Apr 2012 18:56:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108938 Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956 enlarges the company court's jurisdiction to questions arising in winding up, but only to the extent needed for effective liquidation and summary disposal of incidental matters. A guarantor's independent liability to indemnify a creditor does not, by itself, arise in the course of winding up, and it is not necessary for the company court to determine that liability for the company's winding up. The guarantor may pursue available defences in the proper forum, including quia-timet relief where appropriate, but that does not convert the dispute into an incidental winding up question. The company court therefore should not assume jurisdiction over the guarantor's liability dispute. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 19 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108938