https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344337 Where a company had already been ordered to be wound up, its assets, monies, records and other property in the company's name vested in the custody of the Company Court and had to be administered by the Official Liquidator under the Companies Act, 1956. The MPID attachment regime could not override that statutory custody, and company assets were required to be transferred to the liquidator. Depositor and investor claims also could not take priority over the winding up distribution scheme; the Companies Act's hierarchy of debts, preferential payments and distribution continued to govern, while the MPID process could proceed only against personal properties of directors or agents not shown to belong to the companies. en-us Fri, 09 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Jun 2017 08:05:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344337 Where a company had already been ordered to be wound up, its assets, monies, records and other property in the company's name vested in the custody of the Company Court and had to be administered by the Official Liquidator under the Companies Act, 1956. The MPID attachment regime could not override that statutory custody, and company assets were required to be transferred to the liquidator. Depositor and investor claims also could not take priority over the winding up distribution scheme; the Companies Act's hierarchy of debts, preferential payments and distribution continued to govern, while the MPID process could proceed only against personal properties of directors or agents not shown to belong to the companies. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 09 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344337