<?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 (3) TMI 1254 - Calcutta High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194539</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the appeals and upheld the Company Court&#039;s decision to refuse the winding-up petitions. The petitioning creditor was directed to seek a civil remedy, as the respondent companies raised a plausible defense. The court found no fault in relegating the petitioning creditor to a civil remedy, excluding the appeal period for limitation calculations under the Limitation Act, 1963.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Sep 2017 21:47:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=489033" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 1254 - Calcutta High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194539</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the appeals and upheld the Company Court&#039;s decision to refuse the winding-up petitions. The petitioning creditor was directed to seek a civil remedy, as the respondent companies raised a plausible defense. The court found no fault in relegating the petitioning creditor to a civil remedy, excluding the appeal period for limitation calculations under the Limitation Act, 1963.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194539</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>