<?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>2016 (8) TMI 1536 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295944</link>
    <description>The petition under Sections 433 (e) &amp;amp; (f) of the Companies Act, 1956 was admitted by the court due to the respondent company&#039;s default in payment, leading to the appointment of the Official Liquidator as the Provisional Liquidator. The Provisional Liquidator was tasked with taking control of the company&#039;s assets, Books of Accounts, and Registered Office. Publication of the petition&#039;s citation was ordered, and the respondent and its Directors were restrained from dealing with assets or bank accounts. Further directions were scheduled, emphasizing the court&#039;s serious intervention to safeguard the petitioner&#039;s interests and prevent asset dissipation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Jun 2021 06:55:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=647870" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 1536 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295944</link>
      <description>The petition under Sections 433 (e) &amp;amp; (f) of the Companies Act, 1956 was admitted by the court due to the respondent company&#039;s default in payment, leading to the appointment of the Official Liquidator as the Provisional Liquidator. The Provisional Liquidator was tasked with taking control of the company&#039;s assets, Books of Accounts, and Registered Office. Publication of the petition&#039;s citation was ordered, and the respondent and its Directors were restrained from dealing with assets or bank accounts. Further directions were scheduled, emphasizing the court&#039;s serious intervention to safeguard the petitioner&#039;s interests and prevent asset dissipation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295944</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>