https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111305 A company court under section 446(2) may determine possession disputes concerning company property in winding up, including whether an occupant is a tenant or trespasser, and may order eviction where occupation is unlawful. A lease executed after commencement of winding up, without leave of court and on terms showing bad faith, inadequate consideration and extended rights over company assets, is void against the liquidator under section 536(2). A claimed tenancy protection under the Andhra Pradesh rent control law was unavailable because the premises fell outside the statutory protection regime and the respondent had no enforceable right to remain in possession. Vacant possession was ordered to be delivered to the official liquidator. en-us Mon, 08 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Dec 2014 11:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111305 A company court under section 446(2) may determine possession disputes concerning company property in winding up, including whether an occupant is a tenant or trespasser, and may order eviction where occupation is unlawful. A lease executed after commencement of winding up, without leave of court and on terms showing bad faith, inadequate consideration and extended rights over company assets, is void against the liquidator under section 536(2). A claimed tenancy protection under the Andhra Pradesh rent control law was unavailable because the premises fell outside the statutory protection regime and the respondent had no enforceable right to remain in possession. Vacant possession was ordered to be delivered to the official liquidator. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 08 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111305