https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459520 The HC allowed the appellant's application to be treated as a first charge holder/secured creditor pari-passu. The court rejected the dismissal based on alleged non-registration under Section 125 of the Companies Act, 1956. The respondent's letter admitting the charge and aggregate principal amount of Rs. 200 lacs was deemed conclusive evidence. The court presumed proper registration absent contrary indication, noting Form No. 8 established submission of necessary documents. The impugned order was set aside, declaring appellant holds pari-passu charge and entitled to pro-rata distribution of sale proceeds. en-us Tue, 19 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Dec 2024 18:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459520 The HC allowed the appellant's application to be treated as a first charge holder/secured creditor pari-passu. The court rejected the dismissal based on alleged non-registration under Section 125 of the Companies Act, 1956. The respondent's letter admitting the charge and aggregate principal amount of Rs. 200 lacs was deemed conclusive evidence. The court presumed proper registration absent contrary indication, noting Form No. 8 established submission of necessary documents. The impugned order was set aside, declaring appellant holds pari-passu charge and entitled to pro-rata distribution of sale proceeds. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 19 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459520