Condonation of refiling delay refused where repeated defects, lack of diligence and vague explanations defeated the appeal against resolution plan app...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
4401 to 4420 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC rejected the applicant's claim for compound interest under s.244A(1)(b) r.w.s.132B(4)(b), which explicitly provides only for simple interest. The Court clarified that its prior order did not mandate cumulative or compound interest calculation. No statutory provision was identified supporting the interpretation of "cumulative interest" as compound interest. Consequently, the opposite parties cannot be held liable for willful disobedience, as no definitive legal framework exists for computing cumulative interest beyond simple interest prescribed by the statutory provision.
HC rejected the applicant's claim for compound interest under s.244A(1)(b) r.w.s.132B(4)(b), which explicitly provides only for simple interest. The Court clarified that its prior order did not mandate cumulative or compound interest calculation. No statutory provision was identified supporting the interpretation of "cumulative interest" as compound interest. Consequently, the opposite parties cannot be held liable for willful disobedience, as no definitive legal framework exists for computing cumulative interest beyond simple interest prescribed by the statutory provision.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
