<?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>2016 (5) TMI 908 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327927</link>
    <description>A company ordered to be wound up loses the ability to institute or defend proceedings in its own name through a director; once the Official Liquidator has taken charge of its assets, such action can be taken only by the liquidator with court sanction. Applying that settled rule, the HC held that a petition filed in the company&#039;s name through its Director was not maintainable after winding up and takeover by the Official Liquidator.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 May 2016 22:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=429165" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 908 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327927</link>
      <description>A company ordered to be wound up loses the ability to institute or defend proceedings in its own name through a director; once the Official Liquidator has taken charge of its assets, such action can be taken only by the liquidator with court sanction. Applying that settled rule, the HC held that a petition filed in the company&#039;s name through its Director was not maintainable after winding up and takeover by the Official Liquidator.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327927</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>