<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2010 (6) TMI 331 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113477</link>
    <description>Section 32 of the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973 was held to apply only to a qualifying mining company whose coal mine had vested in the Central Government or a Government company under the Act. A company that did not establish ownership of such a coal mine could not claim the statutory protection, so a creditor&#039;s winding-up petition was not barred for want of Central Government consent. On the decree-based claim, the company did not show sufficient cause to resist admission, as the decree remained outstanding and no effective steps to set it aside were shown. The petition was therefore admitted, subject to security and costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 05 Oct 2014 16:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150483" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (6) TMI 331 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113477</link>
      <description>Section 32 of the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973 was held to apply only to a qualifying mining company whose coal mine had vested in the Central Government or a Government company under the Act. A company that did not establish ownership of such a coal mine could not claim the statutory protection, so a creditor&#039;s winding-up petition was not barred for want of Central Government consent. On the decree-based claim, the company did not show sufficient cause to resist admission, as the decree remained outstanding and no effective steps to set it aside were shown. The petition was therefore admitted, subject to security and costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113477</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>