<?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>2006 (1) TMI 260 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111057</link>
    <description>Sections 529 and 529A of the Companies Act preserve pari passu rights between workmen and secured creditors only within the statutory scheme, so workmen do not have an exclusive first charge over liquidation sale proceeds; the claim to priority over all secured creditors was rejected. Participation by secured creditors in a court-supervised sale process or sale committee does not by itself amount to relinquishment of security, because surrender requires a positive act; their security was therefore treated as continuing. The earlier distribution was not final, and the workmen&#039;s claims were ordered to be reverified before final apportionment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2012 11:08:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148073" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (1) TMI 260 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111057</link>
      <description>Sections 529 and 529A of the Companies Act preserve pari passu rights between workmen and secured creditors only within the statutory scheme, so workmen do not have an exclusive first charge over liquidation sale proceeds; the claim to priority over all secured creditors was rejected. Participation by secured creditors in a court-supervised sale process or sale committee does not by itself amount to relinquishment of security, because surrender requires a positive act; their security was therefore treated as continuing. The earlier distribution was not final, and the workmen&#039;s claims were ordered to be reverified before final apportionment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111057</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>