<?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>2015 (10) TMI 1523 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266248</link>
    <description>A declaration of a company as a relief undertaking under the Bombay Relief Undertakings Act, 1958 suspends enforcement of accrued rights and stays proceedings during the notification, but it does not bar every interim order. The Court may still grant a protective restraint on disposal of assets where the order is directed only to preserving the subject matter and preventing dissipation pending adjudication of a winding up petition. Such an order is not enforcement of the debt itself. Earlier authorities on relief undertakings were distinguished because they concerned execution and similar proceedings, not ancillary protection of property. If asset disposal is genuinely required for business reasons, leave of the Court may be sought.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2015 08:02:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=402194" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (10) TMI 1523 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266248</link>
      <description>A declaration of a company as a relief undertaking under the Bombay Relief Undertakings Act, 1958 suspends enforcement of accrued rights and stays proceedings during the notification, but it does not bar every interim order. The Court may still grant a protective restraint on disposal of assets where the order is directed only to preserving the subject matter and preventing dissipation pending adjudication of a winding up petition. Such an order is not enforcement of the debt itself. Earlier authorities on relief undertakings were distinguished because they concerned execution and similar proceedings, not ancillary protection of property. If asset disposal is genuinely required for business reasons, leave of the Court may be sought.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266248</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>