<?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>1987 (4) TMI 490 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200594</link>
    <description>A winding-up petition may be refused where it is used as a device to bypass rejected closure permission under labour law. The court treated the company&#039;s earlier closure attempts, the absence of any genuine effort to revive the business, and the public character of the undertaking as relevant to bona fides, and regarded the petition as mala fide and an abuse of process. It also stated that, where winding up would defeat special statutory controls on closure of an industrial undertaking and the two regimes cannot operate together, the later special labour statute prevails. The petition therefore could not succeed without closure permission.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Apr 2018 15:56:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=516106" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (4) TMI 490 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200594</link>
      <description>A winding-up petition may be refused where it is used as a device to bypass rejected closure permission under labour law. The court treated the company&#039;s earlier closure attempts, the absence of any genuine effort to revive the business, and the public character of the undertaking as relevant to bona fides, and regarded the petition as mala fide and an abuse of process. It also stated that, where winding up would defeat special statutory controls on closure of an industrial undertaking and the two regimes cannot operate together, the later special labour statute prevails. The petition therefore could not succeed without closure permission.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200594</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>