SC: Appeal U/S 374 CrPC/415 BNSS is Not Maintainable Against Sessions Court's Reversal of Acquittal  ||  SC Asked the Centre to Promote Awareness About the Consequences of Driving With an Expired Licence  ||  SC Explains How a Deceased Christian Wife's Property Devolves under the Indian Succession Act  ||  Supreme Court: Reach Stacker isn't a Motor Vehicle; MACT Claim Not Maintainable  ||  Supreme Court: Lift Makers, Operators and Owners Share Responsibility for User Safety  ||  Patna HC: Pressure to Sign Divorce and Child Custody does not Amount to Cruelty  ||  Bombay HC: Externment under the Police Act Requires Satisfaction About a Gang's Activities  ||  Bombay HC: False Travel Distance Claim Alone Doesn't Constitute Misappropriation  ||  J&K&L High Court: Interest on Delayed Gratuity is Not a Mandatory Pre-Deposit For an Appeal  ||  Meghalaya HC: Meritorious Candidate Cannot Be Denied Admission For a Two-Minute Delay    

Re Conchubar Aromatics Ltd and other matters - (10 Dec 2015)

Singapore HC preemptively restrains creditor meeting

Company

Singapore High Court granted an order of restraint against creditors of a company in receivership, installing, essentially, a moratorium till the Applicants could restructure and rescue the company. Under Section 210(10) of the Companies Act, the court is empowered to restrain any such creditor meetings that could jeopardize attempts to revive the company, save when a resolution for winding up of the company had already been passed or agreement reached between the company and its creditors. The Court concluded that for exercise of its power, there must be a proposal for compromise or arrangement only, holding of a meeting was not a prerequisite. Determining the proposal of the Applicants to be sufficiently feasible under a “broad brush assessment” and nothing to show that the proposal was not bona fide, restraint order for 10 weeks was passed.

Tags : SINGAPORE   RESTRAINT   CREDITOR MEETING   PREEMPT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved