https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341035 The Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the Company Judge's order directing the appellant to deposit Rs. 1.10 crores with the official liquidator. The Court held that the appellant's bye-laws, being statutory, govern the handling of deposits, providing a mechanism for settling claims. It was clarified that any surplus remaining after settling claims should be paid to the official liquidator. The official liquidator's application was dismissed, and the appellant's application was allowed, emphasizing the statutory nature of the bye-laws in handling defaulting members' deposits. en-us Wed, 01 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Apr 2017 07:05:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341035 The Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the Company Judge's order directing the appellant to deposit Rs. 1.10 crores with the official liquidator. The Court held that the appellant's bye-laws, being statutory, govern the handling of deposits, providing a mechanism for settling claims. It was clarified that any surplus remaining after settling claims should be paid to the official liquidator. The official liquidator's application was dismissed, and the appellant's application was allowed, emphasizing the statutory nature of the bye-laws in handling defaulting members' deposits. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 01 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341035