https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112424 Settlement with depositors removed only one basis for the winding-up petition and did not by itself justify recalling the provisional liquidator. The petition also continued on other statutory grounds under the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, including alleged irregular conduct in the company's affairs and consequences flowing from rejection of registration and the ensuing prohibitory orders. Because the matter remained at the show-cause stage and had not been finally adjudicated, the respondent could still contest those remaining grounds on merits. At that stage, recall of the provisional liquidator was therefore not maintainable and was rejected. en-us Mon, 28 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 28 Apr 2012 13:58:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112424 Settlement with depositors removed only one basis for the winding-up petition and did not by itself justify recalling the provisional liquidator. The petition also continued on other statutory grounds under the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, including alleged irregular conduct in the company's affairs and consequences flowing from rejection of registration and the ensuing prohibitory orders. Because the matter remained at the show-cause stage and had not been finally adjudicated, the respondent could still contest those remaining grounds on merits. At that stage, recall of the provisional liquidator was therefore not maintainable and was rejected. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 28 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112424