<?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>2005 (7) TMI 643 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171259</link>
    <description>The court held that despite the arbitration clause in the agreements mandating arbitration under Swiss law, a winding-up petition under the Companies Act was maintainable. It found that the petitioner had fulfilled its obligations regarding technical know-how, while the respondent&#039;s financial difficulties and inability to pay debts justified winding up the company. The court appointed the Official Liquidator to oversee the process.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2015 14:46:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=390338" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (7) TMI 643 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171259</link>
      <description>The court held that despite the arbitration clause in the agreements mandating arbitration under Swiss law, a winding-up petition under the Companies Act was maintainable. It found that the petitioner had fulfilled its obligations regarding technical know-how, while the respondent&#039;s financial difficulties and inability to pay debts justified winding up the company. The court appointed the Official Liquidator to oversee the process.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171259</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>