https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213373 A statutory notice under section 434(1)(a) of the Companies Act, 1956 is treated as duly served when it is sent by registered post to the company's registered office in the prescribed manner, even if returned with an endorsement that the office was closed. The company cannot defeat the statutory presumption of service by its own closure or failure to receive the notice. On that basis, objections to maintainability failed. The court also declined to recall the ex parte admission order and appointment of the provisional liquidator, holding that non-service on counsel before the Debt Recovery Tribunal did not by itself amount to fraud or justify recall absent any substantive defence. en-us Wed, 22 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Feb 2013 10:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213373 A statutory notice under section 434(1)(a) of the Companies Act, 1956 is treated as duly served when it is sent by registered post to the company's registered office in the prescribed manner, even if returned with an endorsement that the office was closed. The company cannot defeat the statutory presumption of service by its own closure or failure to receive the notice. On that basis, objections to maintainability failed. The court also declined to recall the ex parte admission order and appointment of the provisional liquidator, holding that non-service on counsel before the Debt Recovery Tribunal did not by itself amount to fraud or justify recall absent any substantive defence. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 22 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213373