<?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>1939 (4) TMI 20 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96794</link>
    <description>The Court ruled in favor of the Official Liquidators regarding the claim of Rs. 5,000, determining it was not specifically entrusted for a particular purpose but rather a standard banking transaction. However, the claim for Rs. 4,200 from three cheques collected by the Bank was upheld, as the receipts indicated the cheques were for collection only, and the Bank realized the amounts post-suspension. The Court allowed preferential payment for the Rs. 4,200. Costs were awarded to both parties, with the applicant receiving Rs. 35 plus Rs. 5 for the Judge&#039;s summons, and the Official Liquidators granted Rs. 35.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Apr 1939 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2012 12:01:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=133852" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1939 (4) TMI 20 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96794</link>
      <description>The Court ruled in favor of the Official Liquidators regarding the claim of Rs. 5,000, determining it was not specifically entrusted for a particular purpose but rather a standard banking transaction. However, the claim for Rs. 4,200 from three cheques collected by the Bank was upheld, as the receipts indicated the cheques were for collection only, and the Bank realized the amounts post-suspension. The Court allowed preferential payment for the Rs. 4,200. Costs were awarded to both parties, with the applicant receiving Rs. 35 plus Rs. 5 for the Judge&#039;s summons, and the Official Liquidators granted Rs. 35.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Apr 1939 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96794</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>