https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291799 An order dismissing a preliminary objection to maintainability can qualify as a judgment under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent when it finally affects a substantive right in pending proceedings, so the appeal was maintainable. Section 633(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 was treated as an independent anticipatory jurisdiction to grant relief where proceedings are apprehended, while Section 633(1) applies to relief in pending proceedings. The commencement of criminal proceedings did not by itself bar a petition under Section 633(2), so the company petition was maintainable and the maintainability objection was rejected. en-us Wed, 27 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:21:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291799 An order dismissing a preliminary objection to maintainability can qualify as a judgment under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent when it finally affects a substantive right in pending proceedings, so the appeal was maintainable. Section 633(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 was treated as an independent anticipatory jurisdiction to grant relief where proceedings are apprehended, while Section 633(1) applies to relief in pending proceedings. The commencement of criminal proceedings did not by itself bar a petition under Section 633(2), so the company petition was maintainable and the maintainability objection was rejected. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 27 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291799