https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96712 The court held that no court fee was required on the sum claimed as a set off as the defendant's claim was for a balance, not the full amount. It was found that there was no evidence of an agreement allowing the defendant to adjust the claimed sum in the accounts. The judge emphasized that special circumstances justifying the adjustment were lacking, and the plaintiff's consent to the adjustment was not proven. Additionally, the court ruled that there was no company lien on fees due to a director, leading to the dismissal of the petition with each party bearing their own costs. en-us Tue, 05 May 1936 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Jan 2012 15:24:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96712 The court held that no court fee was required on the sum claimed as a set off as the defendant's claim was for a balance, not the full amount. It was found that there was no evidence of an agreement allowing the defendant to adjust the claimed sum in the accounts. The judge emphasized that special circumstances justifying the adjustment were lacking, and the plaintiff's consent to the adjustment was not proven. Additionally, the court ruled that there was no company lien on fees due to a director, leading to the dismissal of the petition with each party bearing their own costs. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 05 May 1936 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96712