Transfers, etc., after commencement of winding up to be void
Section 334 of the Companies Act, 2013 deals with transfers, etc., after commencement of winding up to be void. [334. Transfers, etc., after commencement of winding up to be void-- In the case of a winding up by the Tribunal, any disposition of the property including actionable claims, of the company and any transfer of shares in the company or alteration in the status of its members, made after the commencem The Act came into force on 01 Apr 2014.
1[334. Transfers, etc., after commencement of winding up to be void-- In the case of a winding up by the Tribunal, any disposition of the property including actionable claims, of the company and any transfer of shares in the company or alteration in the status of its members, made after the commencement of the winding up shall, unless the Tribunal otherwise orders, be void.]
Section 334, The Companies Act, 2013 (Act 18 of 2013).
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Pankaj Mehra vs State of Maharashtra
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The Court held that the word 'void' in Section 536(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 is not used peremptorily: dispositions made between presentation of the winding-up petition and the winding-up order are not void ab initio but become void only when a winding-up order is made or a provisional liquidator appointed, the voidness then relating back by the fiction in Section 441(2); the words 'unless the Court otherwise orders' show the court may validate bona fide transactions in the ordinary course of business, and a contrary reading would paralyse the company's trading.
On this section: It settles the meaning of 'shall be void' in the provision now re-enacted as Section 334, holding the avoidance to be contingent and curable by the Tribunal rather than automatic on presentation of the petition.
-
The Official Liquidator of vs Registrar of Trade Marks
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Dealing with the Yezdi trade marks of Ideal Jawa in liquidation, the Court held that a purported disposition of the company's property after commencement of winding up, made without the leave of the Company Court, is void under Section 536(2), and that intangible assets such as trade marks and the goodwill attached to them vest in the Official Liquidator for sale by public auction; the subsequent registrations obtained by third parties were nullified and their use of the mark injuncted.
On this section: It applies the avoidance rule now contained in Section 334 to intellectual property, holding that trade marks and goodwill are 'property' whose post-commencement disposition is void without the court's sanction.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… He also argued that on merits also the petitioner is not entitled to any relief, pointing out that the action of the Director or Managing Director of the Company to furnish the property of a company which was ordered to be wound up was contrary to the provisions contained in Section 283, 290 and 334 of the Companies Act. 10. I have considered the contentions raised on either side. The petitioner is seeking a direction to a Co-operative bank to extend the counter bank guarantee issued by it. The larger Bench of this Court has in Association of Milma Officers' case held that a Writ Petition against a …
Questions about Section 334
What have the courts held on Section 334 of the Companies Act?
Pankaj Mehra vs State of Maharashtra (15 Feb 2000) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: It settles the meaning of 'shall be void' in the provision now re-enacted as Section 334, holding the avoidance to be contingent and curable by the Tribunal rather than automatic on presentation of the petition. Another 1 judgment on this section is set out below, 1 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2000 to 2022.
How do I find court cases under Section 334 of the Companies Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: Companies Act 334, section 334 Companies Act, section 334 of the Companies Act. People searching for it also type companies ordinance 334. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 2 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Pankaj Mehra vs State of Maharashtra (15 Feb 2000).
When did Section 334 of the Companies Act come into force?
Section 334 of the Companies Act, cited as Companies Act 334, came into force on 01 Apr 2014, having been enacted on 29 Aug 2013. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 2. Definitions5089 words
- 143. Powers and duties of auditors and auditing standards1867 words
- 230. Power to compromise or make arrangements with creditors and members1432 words
- 232. Merger and amalgamation of companies1416 words
- 149. Company to have Board of Directors1403 words
- 217. Procedure, powers, etc., of inspectors1390 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.