https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338819 The appellate court found no basis to interfere with orders admitting the winding-up petition, appointing a provisional liquidator, and refusing selective settlement with a few creditors. Multiple unpaid creditors, dishonoured cheques, and an unreliable statement of affairs supported the view that the company's assets and liabilities required collective resolution. Because the debts were not disputed in principle and the company had sought piecemeal settlements after provisional liquidation, selective satisfaction would have given impermissible preference to some unsecured creditors over others. The court treated the conduct as consistent with acquiescence in winding-up and held that a comprehensive compromise or arrangement, not selective payment, was the proper course. en-us Thu, 09 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Feb 2017 10:02:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338819 The appellate court found no basis to interfere with orders admitting the winding-up petition, appointing a provisional liquidator, and refusing selective settlement with a few creditors. Multiple unpaid creditors, dishonoured cheques, and an unreliable statement of affairs supported the view that the company's assets and liabilities required collective resolution. Because the debts were not disputed in principle and the company had sought piecemeal settlements after provisional liquidation, selective satisfaction would have given impermissible preference to some unsecured creditors over others. The court treated the conduct as consistent with acquiescence in winding-up and held that a comprehensive compromise or arrangement, not selective payment, was the proper course. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 09 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338819