The petition was disposed of. An earlier winding-up order against the respondent in Company Petition 111 of 1998 warranted this disposal, with the petitioner permitted to pursue claims before the Official Liquidator.
The company petition is disposed of; the petitioner may raise claims before the Official Liquidator.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J.
COMPANY PETITION NO. 271 OF 1998
Times Guaranty Finances Ltd.
... Petitioners.
V/s.
M/s. Elar Fashions Ltd. ... Respondents.
None for the Petitioners. None for the Respondents.
.... CORAM : DR. D.Y.CHANDRACHUD,J. 10th April 2007. P.C. : . An order of winding up has been passed against the Respondent in Company Petition 111 of 1998. In the circumstances, the Company Petition is disposed of leaving it open to the Petitioner to raise his
claim before the Official Liquidator in the liquidation proceeding.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the company petition for winding up should be disposed of given a prior winding up order in a related petition.
Times Guaranty Finances Ltd.
M/s. Elar Fashions Ltd.
Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
