against an individual, be deemed in his insolvency to be a fraudulent preference; (g) any other matter for which in the opinion of the [Tribunal
against an individual, be deemed in his insolvency to be a fraudulent preference; (h) removal of the managing director, manager or any of the directors
Section 531 in The Companies Act, 1956
531. Fraudulent preference .-
(1) Any transfer of property, movable or immovable, delivery of goods, payment, execution or other ... adjudged insolvent, would be deemed in his insolvency a fraudulent preference, shall in the event of the company being wound-up, be deemed a fraudulent
other enactment for the time being in force, be void as fraudulent preference if he were adjudged an insolvent; (d) if, with intent to defeat
enactment for the time being in force, be void as a fraudulent preference if he were adjudged an insolvent; (d) if, with intent to defeat
holder assigning decree-Adjudication as
insolvent on ground of assignment being fraudulent
preference-Whether upon adjudication decree vests in
official Receiver-Orderannulling assignment-if relates ... adjudicated an insolvent on the ground that the
assignment was a fraudulent preference. Thereafter M made a
second application for execution which was disposed
report, the impugned transfer was not challenged in terms as a fraudulent preference, but was challenged on the ground of the same being ... briefly summarised as under :
(a) The impugned transaction amounted to "fraudulent preference" of one creditor in preference to other creditors within the meaning
Companies Act, 1956
533. Liabilities and rights of certain fraudulently preferred persons .-
(1) Where, in the case of a company which is being wound ... commencement of this Act is invalid under section 531 as a fraudulent preference of a person interested in property mortgaged or charged to secure
books of the bank were made by way of fraudulent preferences in favour of some of the creditors of the bank and for ancillary reliefs ... entries as evidence of payments, declared such payments to be fraudulent preferences, and ordered each of the creditors preferred to pay to the liquidator
garnishees T.B. Mehta and Sons, was void as a fraudulent preference under Section 56 of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act or in the alternative ... being bona fide transactions and further as constituting a fraudulent preference of that firm in that the proceeds were largely utilised for discharging certain promissory