<?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 (7) TMI 813 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126881</link>
    <description>A securitisation company acting as trustee for a trust created for security receipt holders was held to fall within the class of secured creditors and therefore had locus standi to maintain winding-up proceedings. A bare and unsupported counter-claim, based on damages and related heads, was not enough to resist an admitted debt. Objections founded on the rate of interest and the respondent-company&#039;s assets also failed, because a substantial liability remained unpaid and no legal basis was shown for the reduced rate or for treating assets as a substitute for payment. The petition was allowed and winding up ordered.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2014 11:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=163767" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (7) TMI 813 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126881</link>
      <description>A securitisation company acting as trustee for a trust created for security receipt holders was held to fall within the class of secured creditors and therefore had locus standi to maintain winding-up proceedings. A bare and unsupported counter-claim, based on damages and related heads, was not enough to resist an admitted debt. Objections founded on the rate of interest and the respondent-company&#039;s assets also failed, because a substantial liability remained unpaid and no legal basis was shown for the reduced rate or for treating assets as a substitute for payment. The petition was allowed and winding up ordered.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126881</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>