1999 (12) TMI 767

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l, Bangalore. The learned judge also prescribed certain terms and conditions in order to ensure that the official liquidator is apprised of the result of the proceedings before the Tribunal and the information relating to the company's properties and more important that the dues of workmen are deposited by the applicant and the applicant seeks permission of the court before the sale of any properties. It is against this order that respondents Nos. 2 to 10 in the company application filed the present appeal. The second appellant was the managing director of the company and others were either directors or sureties. The company was wound up by an order of this court dated November 16, 1998. While winding up proceedings were pending, the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e the liquidation during the pendency of the winding up petition and not after the company is wound up. The learned judge rightly held that section 446 does not place any such limitation. We fail to understand as to why even before the winding up order is passed, the secured creditor should seek permission to continue the suits or other proceedings against the company and to stay outside the liquidation process. The last contention vehemently urged by learned counsel is that the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Ranganathan (M.K.) v. Govt. of Madras [1955] 25 Comp Cas 344 , reiterated in Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India Ltd. v. Srinivas Agencies [1996] 86 Comp Cas 255 no longer holds good after the introduc....