https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98393 NCLAT held that proceedings concerning an alleged company deposit under Sections 73(4) and 74(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 could be examined by the NCLT on their own merits despite pending probate proceedings, because the tribunal had jurisdiction over whether the deposit was made, the amount due, and its proper safekeeping. The earlier appellate order was confined to substitution of the deceased petitioner and did not bar adjudication of the deposit dispute. It further held that claimant-beneficiaries may prosecute limited protective proceedings for preservation of the estate before probate is granted, and that Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act does not bar such protective relief. en-us Fri, 03 Apr 2026 08:49:32 +0530 Fri, 03 Apr 2026 08:49:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98393 NCLAT held that proceedings concerning an alleged company deposit under Sections 73(4) and 74(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 could be examined by the NCLT on their own merits despite pending probate proceedings, because the tribunal had jurisdiction over whether the deposit was made, the amount due, and its proper safekeeping. The earlier appellate order was confined to substitution of the deceased petitioner and did not bar adjudication of the deposit dispute. It further held that claimant-beneficiaries may prosecute limited protective proceedings for preservation of the estate before probate is granted, and that Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act does not bar such protective relief. Highlights Companies Law Fri, 03 Apr 2026 08:49:32 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98393