https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234417 Appointment of a provisional liquidator under Section 450 of the Companies Act, 1956 is a discretionary interim measure requiring a strong prima facie case and demonstrated necessity to protect company assets, creditors, and public interest. On the facts, the Court found sufficient concern to justify protective supervision because the company was not carrying on business, dues were substantial, and management conduct caused suspicion, but it held that full control through a provisional liquidator was too drastic at that stage. Alleged asset transfers made in disregard of Section 22A of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 were also not finally declared fraudulent, invalid, or void in the interim proceeding; final questions were left for the pending winding-up matter. en-us Thu, 19 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Jun 2013 12:15:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234417 Appointment of a provisional liquidator under Section 450 of the Companies Act, 1956 is a discretionary interim measure requiring a strong prima facie case and demonstrated necessity to protect company assets, creditors, and public interest. On the facts, the Court found sufficient concern to justify protective supervision because the company was not carrying on business, dues were substantial, and management conduct caused suspicion, but it held that full control through a provisional liquidator was too drastic at that stage. Alleged asset transfers made in disregard of Section 22A of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 were also not finally declared fraudulent, invalid, or void in the interim proceeding; final questions were left for the pending winding-up matter. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 19 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234417