https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110707 An injunction restraining alienation of company assets and an undertaking that assets would remain available to meet liability did not create a mortgage, charge, or lien in favour of the claimant, and no registered charge under section 125 of the Companies Act, 1956 was shown. The claimant was therefore not a secured creditor. In winding up, any claim had to be worked out within the statutory scheme under sections 529 and 529A, which preserves the pari passu rights of workmen and secured creditors. The claimant could not assert priority over those classes merely on the basis of the earlier court order or undertaking, and the claim remained subject to the Companies Act framework. en-us Mon, 16 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:00:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110707 An injunction restraining alienation of company assets and an undertaking that assets would remain available to meet liability did not create a mortgage, charge, or lien in favour of the claimant, and no registered charge under section 125 of the Companies Act, 1956 was shown. The claimant was therefore not a secured creditor. In winding up, any claim had to be worked out within the statutory scheme under sections 529 and 529A, which preserves the pari passu rights of workmen and secured creditors. The claimant could not assert priority over those classes merely on the basis of the earlier court order or undertaking, and the claim remained subject to the Companies Act framework. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 16 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110707