https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112088 A secured creditor who was not the petitioner in winding-up proceedings could not be treated as the petitioner for the purpose of bearing preliminary advertisement and other winding-up expenses. The court held that such costs could not be fastened on the creditor merely because it held security interests. Where the company had no available assets, the official liquidator was to incur the necessary expenses under rule 292 with leave of the court, using the Central Government fund or permanent advance, and later recoup those amounts from the company's assets in priority to debts. The direction requiring the secured creditor to deposit the advertisement expenses was therefore set aside. en-us Fri, 08 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Dec 2014 14:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112088 A secured creditor who was not the petitioner in winding-up proceedings could not be treated as the petitioner for the purpose of bearing preliminary advertisement and other winding-up expenses. The court held that such costs could not be fastened on the creditor merely because it held security interests. Where the company had no available assets, the official liquidator was to incur the necessary expenses under rule 292 with leave of the court, using the Central Government fund or permanent advance, and later recoup those amounts from the company's assets in priority to debts. The direction requiring the secured creditor to deposit the advertisement expenses was therefore set aside. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 08 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112088