https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784584 The dominant issue was whether continued freezing of the company's bank accounts could be sustained and whether former directors and the bank had locus to seek recall/clarification of the defreezing order. The HC held that once the ROC, pursuant to MCA directions, unmarked the "management dispute," no fetter could remain; in any event, such ROC marking concerns statutory compliances and cannot justify a bank's operational freeze. The HC further held that, with the NCLT having dismissed the challenge to removal/non-reappointment of the concerned directors and no stay operating despite a pending NCLAT appeal, those persons lacked locus to object to account operations or seek recall, and the bank had no subsisting justification to withhold compliance. The impugned order suspending the parent defreezing order for want of reasons was set aside and the appeal was disposed of. en-us Mon, 05 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Jan 2026 08:19:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784584 The dominant issue was whether continued freezing of the company's bank accounts could be sustained and whether former directors and the bank had locus to seek recall/clarification of the defreezing order. The HC held that once the ROC, pursuant to MCA directions, unmarked the "management dispute," no fetter could remain; in any event, such ROC marking concerns statutory compliances and cannot justify a bank's operational freeze. The HC further held that, with the NCLT having dismissed the challenge to removal/non-reappointment of the concerned directors and no stay operating despite a pending NCLAT appeal, those persons lacked locus to object to account operations or seek recall, and the bank had no subsisting justification to withhold compliance. The impugned order suspending the parent defreezing order for want of reasons was set aside and the appeal was disposed of. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 05 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784584