https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460010 An application under rule 67 for directions to convene a creditors' meeting under section 391(1) is to be moved ex parte; at that stage the court need only form a prima facie view on the scheme's bona fides and compliance with the rules, so prior notice and personal hearing to an unsecured creditor who is also the petitioner in a pending winding up petition are not required. By contrast, a stay application under section 391(6) is subject to rule 71, which mandates notice to the petitioner in the pending winding up petition. Accordingly, the meeting could be convened without prior hearing to the objector, but the stay request was not maintainable without the required notice. en-us Mon, 26 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Jan 2025 12:37:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460010 An application under rule 67 for directions to convene a creditors' meeting under section 391(1) is to be moved ex parte; at that stage the court need only form a prima facie view on the scheme's bona fides and compliance with the rules, so prior notice and personal hearing to an unsecured creditor who is also the petitioner in a pending winding up petition are not required. By contrast, a stay application under section 391(6) is subject to rule 71, which mandates notice to the petitioner in the pending winding up petition. Accordingly, the meeting could be convened without prior hearing to the objector, but the stay request was not maintainable without the required notice. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 26 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460010