https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775274 Service on the applicant's recognised advocate was treated as effective service, and objections based on lack of notice, want of locus standi, and alleged suppression were rejected because the disputed facts were not material to disclaimer of an onerous burden. The earlier winding-up direction was not treated as a decree for specific performance, as it was conditional on registration and no enforceable agreement subsisted; section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act therefore did not apply. The prior dismissal for default of the enforcement proceeding also barred re-agitation of the same claim, and no independent ground for recall or review was shown. The earlier disclaimer order was left undisturbed. en-us Fri, 18 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Jul 2025 08:29:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775274 Service on the applicant's recognised advocate was treated as effective service, and objections based on lack of notice, want of locus standi, and alleged suppression were rejected because the disputed facts were not material to disclaimer of an onerous burden. The earlier winding-up direction was not treated as a decree for specific performance, as it was conditional on registration and no enforceable agreement subsisted; section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act therefore did not apply. The prior dismissal for default of the enforcement proceeding also barred re-agitation of the same claim, and no independent ground for recall or review was shown. The earlier disclaimer order was left undisturbed. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 18 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775274