https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113590 The court granted the petition for winding up the company and appointed a Provisional Liquidator due to the respondent's failure to complete construction as per the agreement. The judgment underscored the legal consequences of non-response to a winding up notice, citing precedent cases and highlighting the importance of the respondent's defense. Failure to complete construction within the agreed timeframe and the lack of response to the winding up notice justified the court's decision to wind up the company and appoint a Provisional Liquidator. en-us Tue, 22 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 May 2012 18:43:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113590 The court granted the petition for winding up the company and appointed a Provisional Liquidator due to the respondent's failure to complete construction as per the agreement. The judgment underscored the legal consequences of non-response to a winding up notice, citing precedent cases and highlighting the importance of the respondent's defense. Failure to complete construction within the agreed timeframe and the lack of response to the winding up notice justified the court's decision to wind up the company and appoint a Provisional Liquidator. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 22 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113590