https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291940 Refusal to adjourn did not amount to a denial of natural justice where the record did not clearly show any subsisting stay, the adjournment request was opposed, and counsel was called on to argue on merits but made no submissions; the High Court therefore erred in setting aside the appellate order on that ground. At the same time, prolonged pendency and unresolved claims concerning revival, winding up, and workmen's dues justified a limited remand to the Appellate Authority subject to deposit, with the lawful dues of the workers to be determined separately by arbitration so that further proceedings could proceed on a proper factual basis. en-us Mon, 24 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Dec 2020 10:11:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291940 Refusal to adjourn did not amount to a denial of natural justice where the record did not clearly show any subsisting stay, the adjournment request was opposed, and counsel was called on to argue on merits but made no submissions; the High Court therefore erred in setting aside the appellate order on that ground. At the same time, prolonged pendency and unresolved claims concerning revival, winding up, and workmen's dues justified a limited remand to the Appellate Authority subject to deposit, with the lawful dues of the workers to be determined separately by arbitration so that further proceedings could proceed on a proper factual basis. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 24 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291940