<?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>1935 (6) TMI 16 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96683</link>
    <description>A sanctioned composition scheme under Section 153 of the Indian Companies Act bound all creditors of the company, including judgment-creditors, and therefore could bar execution of decrees obtained before the scheme. The Section 47 CPC objection succeeded because the prior date of the decrees did not prevent the composition from operating on them; otherwise the object of the scheme would be defeated. The execution proceedings could not continue, and the appeals were allowed with the execution cases dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Jun 1935 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2012 12:54:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=133741" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1935 (6) TMI 16 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96683</link>
      <description>A sanctioned composition scheme under Section 153 of the Indian Companies Act bound all creditors of the company, including judgment-creditors, and therefore could bar execution of decrees obtained before the scheme. The Section 47 CPC objection succeeded because the prior date of the decrees did not prevent the composition from operating on them; otherwise the object of the scheme would be defeated. The execution proceedings could not continue, and the appeals were allowed with the execution cases dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Jun 1935 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96683</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>