https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112587 A winding-up order passed without first admitting the company petition and without complying with the mandatory notice and advertisement requirements under the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 was held illegal. Rules 96 and 24 were treated as safeguards ensuring that the company is heard before drastic winding-up relief is made operative. Because the statutory procedure was mandatory, non-compliance vitiated the order and it could not be preserved by partial remand. The winding-up order was set aside and the matter was remitted to the company court for fresh consideration in accordance with law. en-us Fri, 10 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Nov 2014 09:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112587 A winding-up order passed without first admitting the company petition and without complying with the mandatory notice and advertisement requirements under the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 was held illegal. Rules 96 and 24 were treated as safeguards ensuring that the company is heard before drastic winding-up relief is made operative. Because the statutory procedure was mandatory, non-compliance vitiated the order and it could not be preserved by partial remand. The winding-up order was set aside and the matter was remitted to the company court for fresh consideration in accordance with law. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 10 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112587