https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113301 The court dismissed the applications due to incomplete and unfeasible schemes proposed by the petitioners, lack of support from secured creditors, and false claims regarding shareholding in the company in liquidation. The judgment highlighted procedural errors, lack of compliance with legal procedures, and failure to obtain necessary approvals from contributories and secured creditors. Costs were imposed on the principal person responsible for the misadventures in the applications, and the committee of management was ordered to continue for asset protection until taken over by the Official Liquidator. en-us Mon, 08 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Oct 2014 14:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113301 The court dismissed the applications due to incomplete and unfeasible schemes proposed by the petitioners, lack of support from secured creditors, and false claims regarding shareholding in the company in liquidation. The judgment highlighted procedural errors, lack of compliance with legal procedures, and failure to obtain necessary approvals from contributories and secured creditors. Costs were imposed on the principal person responsible for the misadventures in the applications, and the committee of management was ordered to continue for asset protection until taken over by the Official Liquidator. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 08 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113301