https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287729 The Debt Recovery Act does not exclude the company court's jurisdiction under section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956 in winding-up matters. The company court retains control over suits, claims, and transfer of proceedings against a company in liquidation to ensure orderly administration and distribution of assets. The debt recovery statute creates a separate forum for expeditious debt recovery, but it does not govern winding up or distribution among creditors. The two enactments operate in distinct fields and must be harmoniously construed. Leave of the company court is therefore not automatically dispensed with; the question must be decided on the facts, including the position of secured and unsecured creditors and the interests of workmen. en-us Wed, 28 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Apr 2020 17:34:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287729 The Debt Recovery Act does not exclude the company court's jurisdiction under section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956 in winding-up matters. The company court retains control over suits, claims, and transfer of proceedings against a company in liquidation to ensure orderly administration and distribution of assets. The debt recovery statute creates a separate forum for expeditious debt recovery, but it does not govern winding up or distribution among creditors. The two enactments operate in distinct fields and must be harmoniously construed. Leave of the company court is therefore not automatically dispensed with; the question must be decided on the facts, including the position of secured and unsecured creditors and the interests of workmen. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 28 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287729