https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220174 The court rejected the Official Liquidator's request for ratification of appointing a Special Arguing Counsel without prior court approval. Emphasizing the need for prior court sanction under the Scheme and Rule 307 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, the court criticized the Official Liquidator's defiance of court orders. Concerned about the disruption caused, the court directed communication of the matter to the Ministry of Corporate Affairs for necessary action. en-us Thu, 19 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Jan 2013 15:38:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220174 The court rejected the Official Liquidator's request for ratification of appointing a Special Arguing Counsel without prior court approval. Emphasizing the need for prior court sanction under the Scheme and Rule 307 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, the court criticized the Official Liquidator's defiance of court orders. Concerned about the disruption caused, the court directed communication of the matter to the Ministry of Corporate Affairs for necessary action. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 19 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220174