<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1932 (2) TMI 20 - HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96581</link>
    <description>A suit to recover unpaid share calls was held within limitation because time ran from forfeiture, not from the earlier date when the calls became due. The voluntary liquidator was found to have statutory authority to sue for recovery of company assets without an express resolution, and the directors&#039; later objection did not defeat that right. A new plea that forfeited shares ought to have been sold was not entertained in second appeal. Interest was not recoverable for the period between forfeiture and suit, as there was no contractual or statutory basis once the defendant ceased to be a shareholder; the decree was varied only to exclude that pre-suit interest.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 1932 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2012 15:36:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=133639" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1932 (2) TMI 20 - HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96581</link>
      <description>A suit to recover unpaid share calls was held within limitation because time ran from forfeiture, not from the earlier date when the calls became due. The voluntary liquidator was found to have statutory authority to sue for recovery of company assets without an express resolution, and the directors&#039; later objection did not defeat that right. A new plea that forfeited shares ought to have been sold was not entertained in second appeal. Interest was not recoverable for the period between forfeiture and suit, as there was no contractual or statutory basis once the defendant ceased to be a shareholder; the decree was varied only to exclude that pre-suit interest.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 1932 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96581</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>