https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197470 The Court held that the petitioner properly served the statutory winding up notice to the respondent company's last known registered office, finding the respondent liable as a guarantor under the Agreement-cum-Pledge. The Court rejected the respondent's argument to encash securities before filing the winding up petition, determining the respondent's liability extended beyond the pledged shares. As the respondent was unable to pay its debts, the Court admitted the winding up petition, appointing the Official Liquidator as Provisional Liquidator to take over the company's assets and records. The respondent company was directed to comply with statutory requirements. en-us Mon, 28 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Feb 2018 10:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197470 The Court held that the petitioner properly served the statutory winding up notice to the respondent company's last known registered office, finding the respondent liable as a guarantor under the Agreement-cum-Pledge. The Court rejected the respondent's argument to encash securities before filing the winding up petition, determining the respondent's liability extended beyond the pledged shares. As the respondent was unable to pay its debts, the Court admitted the winding up petition, appointing the Official Liquidator as Provisional Liquidator to take over the company's assets and records. The respondent company was directed to comply with statutory requirements. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 28 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197470