<?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>2009 (3) TMI 583 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114047</link>
    <description>A revival scheme in liquidation may be upheld where it is bona fide, commercially viable, and aimed at genuine rehabilitation rather than asset disposal; the text notes that separate arrangement meetings were not treated as fatal where affected interests had already been considered. Proceedings affecting a company&#039;s assets after winding up cannot be enforced without company court control, so a post-winding-up decree was described as unenforceable without leave, while refund of advance amounts with interest and a corresponding charge was recognised. Claims not included in the adjudicated liability could not be expanded in liquidation, and an unsuccessful auction purchaser whose sale was not confirmed was entitled to refund with compensation rather than sale confirmation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 May 2012 12:48:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151053" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (3) TMI 583 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114047</link>
      <description>A revival scheme in liquidation may be upheld where it is bona fide, commercially viable, and aimed at genuine rehabilitation rather than asset disposal; the text notes that separate arrangement meetings were not treated as fatal where affected interests had already been considered. Proceedings affecting a company&#039;s assets after winding up cannot be enforced without company court control, so a post-winding-up decree was described as unenforceable without leave, while refund of advance amounts with interest and a corresponding charge was recognised. Claims not included in the adjudicated liability could not be expanded in liquidation, and an unsuccessful auction purchaser whose sale was not confirmed was entitled to refund with compensation rather than sale confirmation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114047</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>