A writ petition filed by ex-directors in the name of a company in liquidation was held not maintainable under Article 226. The court dismissed the petition, allowing withdrawal with liberty to file by ex-directors in their own name.
Petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file by ex-directors in their own name.
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.
$~13.
(IN LIQUIDATION) ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Manohar Malik and Ms. Renuka Iyer, Advs.
versus
ALLAHABAD BANK AND ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Pankaj Jain, Adv. for R-1&2.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
O R D E R % 03.05.2016
page 1 of 2
W.P.(C) No.7006/2015
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J
MAY 03, 2016
‘pp’ ..
page 2 of 2
W.P.(C) No.7006/2015
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a petition under Article 226 by a company in liquidation is maintainable if filed by ex-directors instead of the Official Liquidator.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M/s Shree Shyam Cotspin Ltd. (in liquidation)
Allahabad Bank and Ors
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
