https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788948 The Calcutta High Court held that a Company Court could retain jurisdiction to scrutinise post-winding-up orders and related actions where the liquidation process had advanced to a practically irreversible stage. The court treated objections based on delay as limited because the alleged acts formed part of a continuing course of conduct involving fraud, and it declined to accept the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code objection at the interlocutory stage because no separate insolvency resolution process had been commenced. As granting stay would preserve the very arrangement under challenge and prematurely affect the appeal, ad interim stay of the impugned judgment was refused. en-us Wed, 25 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Apr 2026 07:51:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788948 The Calcutta High Court held that a Company Court could retain jurisdiction to scrutinise post-winding-up orders and related actions where the liquidation process had advanced to a practically irreversible stage. The court treated objections based on delay as limited because the alleged acts formed part of a continuing course of conduct involving fraud, and it declined to accept the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code objection at the interlocutory stage because no separate insolvency resolution process had been commenced. As granting stay would preserve the very arrangement under challenge and prematurely affect the appeal, ad interim stay of the impugned judgment was refused. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 25 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788948