https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109561 In a winding up petition where no winding up order had been made, the court considered that the deeming rule on commencement of winding up under section 441 had not yet taken effect and the avoidance rules for dispositions and preferences did not operate in the same way as in an actual liquidation. On the facts, the court treated the proposed settlement and transfer of the Guwahati property as a bona fide, company-focused arrangement supported by shareholders and not opposed by other creditors, and found it to be the best means of meeting liabilities and avoiding liquidation. The objections based on pari passu treatment, representative character, and alleged illegality of the sale were rejected. en-us Tue, 22 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Apr 2012 17:43:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109561 In a winding up petition where no winding up order had been made, the court considered that the deeming rule on commencement of winding up under section 441 had not yet taken effect and the avoidance rules for dispositions and preferences did not operate in the same way as in an actual liquidation. On the facts, the court treated the proposed settlement and transfer of the Guwahati property as a bona fide, company-focused arrangement supported by shareholders and not opposed by other creditors, and found it to be the best means of meeting liabilities and avoiding liquidation. The objections based on pari passu treatment, representative character, and alleged illegality of the sale were rejected. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 22 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109561