Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (0.57 seconds)Section 434 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
The Indian Stamp Act, 1899
The Aircraft Act, 1934
Madhusudan Gordhandas & Co vs Madhu Woollen Industries Pvt. Ltd on 29 October, 1971
22. Admittedly, the respondent Company had not chosen to
terminate the contract. It had continued to avail the services. Therefore in
my opinion, it cannot now turn around and say, there is a violation of the
provisions of the Aircraft Act or the C.A.R. Rules made there under and
therefore the liability ceased. I thus find that the respondent Company has
miserably failed to satisfy the three pronged test suggested by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Mathusudan Gordhandas & Co. v. Madhu Woollen
Industries (P) Ltd., supra, and hence had rendered itself liable to be wound
up for its inability to pay its debts under Section 433 (e) of the Companies
Page No.40/45
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Comp. Pet.No.363 of 2015
and C.A.Nos.887, 888 of 2015
and CA No.55 of 2020
Act 1956.