https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212922 The court dismissed the application under Section 468 of the Companies Act, 1956, as it found no merit in the claims for interest on deposits after maturity and liability for damages. The court determined that the respondents were not liable for interest or damages post-maturity, especially as the company promptly acted on communication from the Official Liquidator. The judgment highlighted the importance of responsible actions by company officials in managing deposit renewals and communication with relevant parties. en-us Thu, 01 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 May 2012 14:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212922 The court dismissed the application under Section 468 of the Companies Act, 1956, as it found no merit in the claims for interest on deposits after maturity and liability for damages. The court determined that the respondents were not liable for interest or damages post-maturity, especially as the company promptly acted on communication from the Official Liquidator. The judgment highlighted the importance of responsible actions by company officials in managing deposit renewals and communication with relevant parties. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 01 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212922