https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37400 Section 555(7)(b) of the Companies Act, 1956 was construed to require the authority to be satisfied that the claimant is entitled to payment from the Companies Liquidation Account and that no application by the same claimant under clause (a) is pending in court. The provision was held to guard against double pursuit of the same claim, not to require inquiry into applications filed by other persons. On the facts noted, the Regional Director's sanction for payment was treated as valid because the record did not establish a pending application by the claimant that would defeat the statutory condition. en-us Wed, 31 Jan 1979 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 13:56:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37400 Section 555(7)(b) of the Companies Act, 1956 was construed to require the authority to be satisfied that the claimant is entitled to payment from the Companies Liquidation Account and that no application by the same claimant under clause (a) is pending in court. The provision was held to guard against double pursuit of the same claim, not to require inquiry into applications filed by other persons. On the facts noted, the Regional Director's sanction for payment was treated as valid because the record did not establish a pending application by the claimant that would defeat the statutory condition. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 31 Jan 1979 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37400